Au revoir, Zaijian, Ciao, Goodbye

Bit of a sentimental title for the end of the semester. Guess I got really attached to you, JOUR1111. 


Quick lecture recap: We had Steve Molk in for the last lecture. I didn't take notes, I just sat there and listened to his experiences and his advice, which was essentially to take every opportunity you have to get yourself out there. It was a powerful last lecture and fitting for an awesome course. Doesn't mean I'm going to stop blogging on here - Steve's lecture only reinforced me wanting to keep writing! 


I just want to share a little something with you. It's my source of inspiration when I feel I can't accomplish anything. In 2009 I did an internship with the International Herald Tribune. It was an amazing experience that I was so lucky to have. I worked with a foreign correspondent, Mark McDonald, on an article about Bruce Lee and helped compile background information. As a result, I got my first byline!


Here's the online edition:


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/12/business/global/12iht-lee.html?pagewanted=all

Good luck to everyone continuing with Journalism! It was a great course and I met awesome people during it, as well as learning a lot.

Investigative Journalism

I’m not going to lie. When I got that email that our economy lecture was being changed to a lecture about investigative journalism, I may or may not have fist-pumped in the library.

Sorry Bruce, but I’d take investigative journalism over any type of economic theory every time!

Great quote to start the lecture off with:

©       “Isn’t all journalism meant to involve questioning investigation of facts and opinions presented to us?” – Ross Coulthart

Bruce explained some of the IN’s of investigative journalism:

ð  Intelligent                                           è Invest

ð  Informed                                            è Inside

ð  Intuitive                                             

Some straightforward stuff but I’m including it anyway, because it was interesting.

*        Critical and thorough investigations
- The journalist is an active participant. Active intervention. Thorough investigation.

*        Custodians of conscience
- Investigation takes society’s norms and holds breaches up to public scrutiny. Civic vice.

*        Social justice
- To give a voice to the voiceless, public interest is key.

*        4^th Estate/Watchdog

-          Journalists represent the interests of those without power, this balances out the power of government.

-          They insure that free flows of information necessary for the functioning of democracy

-          Journalists make accountable public personalities and institutions whose functions impact social and political life.

Investigative journalism can involve: interviews, observations, documents, leaks, briefings, trespass and theft.

The 1826 example threw me, I didn’t know investigative journalism first took place so long ago (Australia was still a colony). The most obvious example of investigative journalism in history is Watergate, Then Bruce pulled up something I expected too, Wikileaks.

Is wikileaks journalism? No. Firstly, it is a bunch of information. The diplomatic cables that the New York Times sorted through and published – THAT is journalism. What wikileaks produced is just data. Casual anecdote; last September I went to see my sister in Sydney. While I was there I was lucky enough to attend Sydney’s “festival of dangerous minds”, at the Opera House. I saw a live broadcast from Julian Assange, and as a budding journalist student, I was excited. Emphasis on WAS. He spent the entire hour justifying his actions, explaining we needed to question government motives and defending his charges. I should have gone to see Noam Chomsky instead, that was a waste of time. I really had hoped he would talk about how wikileaks has changed the nature of investigative journalism, and was left bitterly disappointed. Cheers, Julian.

Happy things/Agenda setting

Contrary to popular belief, I actually thoroughly enjoy learning heaps of theory, especially when it comes to Journalism. Although I'm a third-year and I should be over this stuff already, nothing gets me happier than colour co-ordinating lecture notes. I'm afraid I fell behind in Journalism, even though I wrote up a few bits of prose I want to publish on here. Before I go on to discuss the lecture, I just want to say that I'm going to keep this blog and will transform it a little. I'm doing three languages and I really want to showcase my ability to speak/write in them. So half of this blog will be in Spanish after the Journalism course is finished. It's something I'm really excited about, and I just wanted to share it. Here are a couple of things that are making me happy today:

My favourite book, my favourite director, and Leo:
http://trailers.apple.com/trailers/wb/thegreatgatsby/

Cake, always amazing, even more amazing when it's RAINBOW CAKE

I can only presume my caffeine addiction will worsen during Swotvac...

One of my favourite movies. Let the world change you, and you can change the world. 

AGENDA SETTING


What is it? The idea that the individual conception of reality is socially constructed through a process of communication. We understand reality through social life The media plays a large role in constructing the social world.

Simply put, the more coverage an issue receives, the more important it is to its people. - Coleman, McCombs, Shaw & Weaver. 

1) Public agenda (what the public thinks is important)
2) Policy agenda (reflecting issues decision makers deem important)
3) Corporate agenda (issues important to big businesses and corporations)
4) Media agenda - the issues that are discussed in the media.

2 BASIC ASSUMPTIONS: 
1) The mass media do not merely reflect and report reality, they filter and shape it.
2) Media concentration on a few issues and subjects leads the public to believe they are more important than others.

Where did it come from?
Originated in 1968, Chapel Hill, NC: Maxwell Combs and Donald Shaw surveyed 100 undecided voters regarding the political campaign & measured it against media content.
- The mass media set the agenda by emphasizing specific topics. The mass media has an effect on public opinion.

Walter Lippman: The mass media creates images of events in our minds. This really rang true for me. Aside from obvious examples like photos from the Vietnam War and 9/11, one image I have never gotten out of my head is that of the Taj Hotel in Mumbai, with smoke rising from the top during the Mumbai terrorist attacks in 2008. I was waiting on CNN for more reports, as my brother was in Mumbai at the time and I didn't have any means of knowing what was going on, all I knew and remembered was that image.

Finally, six different areas of agenda setting:
1) Media gatekeeping: the exposure of an issue and what the media chooses to reveal
2) Media advocacy: promoting a message through the media
3) Agenda cutting: Backseating issues to put forward more popular ones, even though the former may be more important. The example that was used was AIDS being backseated for Justin Beiber's haircut - it's scary how many people know what style the Beibs is fronting nowadays. I didn't even realize he cut the curtains off. AIDS is a preferable topic. I still cannot fathom why people can have such an in-depth knowledge of other peoples lives and celebrity facts but can't use proper English. Sigh.
4) Agenda surfing: The media uses crowds and trends : KONY KONY KONY KONY KONY. Just saying.
5) Diffusion of news: process through which an important event is communicated to the public. The example was of Obama delivering the "Osama is dead" speech. Depressingly enough, even though I am a proud American and an aspiring Journalist...I found out about that through Facebook. So shameful!
6) Portrayal of an issue: different aspects, depends on what agenda. The way an issue is portrayed will influence how it is perceived.
7) Media dependence: The more media dependant  a person is on the media for information, the more likely it is for them to accept media agenda setting.

News Values

In this lecture Bruce explained News Values, pretty straightforward stuff but interesting nonetheless and with lovely quotes I intend to prettify on here.

‘The degree of prominence a media outlet gives to a story’ – Stuart Hall.

News values have:

*        Impact

*        Audience identification

*        Pragmatics

*        Source influence

Newsworthiness: a set of generally agreed upon values.

ð  What makes something newsworthy?
Bruce mentions a LOT of theories. The one I agree with the most is Murray Masterson’s ‘Big Six’ – Significance, proximity, conflict, human interest, novelty and prominence. BUT, I agree with Judy MacGregor in that visual attractiveness does play a large part of making something newsworthy. Not that it wasn’t ‘newsworthy’ in the beginning, but the image of the Twin Towers with black smoke plummeting out of the top is unforgettable.

ð  Are they the same across cultures/countries?
Obviously there will be some bits of news that will crossover, but for the majority, no. Different cultures and countries have different priorities. As mentioned above, part of what makes something ’newsworthy’ is RELEVANCE. How relevant is the fact that CY Leung decided to put an end to the large influx of Mainland Chinese women coming into Hong Kong to birth their babies in Australia? Not very.

Some threats to newsworthiness:

*        Journalism /Commercialization of Media/Social Life

*        Journalism/Public Relations

*        Journalism ideas vs. Journalism realities

Something I found interesting - Jay Rosen’s quote that the people formerly known as the audience. I loved the phrase ‘the writing readers’ because that’s exactly what I am. In Hong Kong I flick to the culture/travel section of Hong Kong Magazine and question things, try to rewrite things I don’t agree with. Rosen’s quote was interesting because it really applies to bloggers and tweeters, and the use of social media in producing and passing on news. I really like the idea of a new balance of power and challenging the information we are presented with. 

Ethics

I did a course on ethics and so I have a pretty decent knowledge of all the ethical theories. I thought the lecture would spend about thirty minutes going into the definition of ethics with examples, and the other half hour examining examples of ethics being tested in Journalism.

Instead, we got a brief definition of ethics - what is right, and what is wrong, and that it is black and white. Then we went through examples of advertising and had to mark on a sheet what we thought was ethical/unethical and what was in good/bad taste. While I understood the purpose, I found this activity to be repetitive and would have much rather been shoved full with information, or at least been given an example of ethics and how ethics has been tested in Journalism.

First, just to briefly outline the theories mentioned in the lecture.

1) Deontology, a rules and principles based approach to ethics which implies you do the right thing by following the rules. Rules include laws, and basic principals. All ethical codes are deontological.

2) Consequentialism - acquiring the right outcome, even if the ends have to justify the means. The greatest good for the greatest number.

3) Virtue Ethics are values that inform the way we live, based on Aristotle's teachings and underline that an ethical person is one with a good character.

How do you know what is good or bad?
I know what is good or bad based on the principles I grew up with. I learnt it is good to treat others the way you would treat yourself. I also learnt that it is bad to punch your little brother and lie about it. In all seriousness though, while my upbringing helped, it was also my experience that changes my view about what is good or bad.

What makes something wrong? In my opinion, if it feels wrong, it probably is.

Okay, onto my little case study. Now you know I'm procrastinating when I start doing this and getting excited about it. Either that or I'm just a little nerd.

As a political science student, I've come across controversial images and articles, and have plenty of examples. One of the examples I am going to use is the production of several cartoon images of the Islam prophet Mohammed in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2005.

NB: If I offend anyone, I offer my sincerest apologies. I do not intend to harm anyone's beliefs, I am merely expressing my opinions.

The cartoons can be seen here:http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/img/IslamicMilitancy10.jpeg
I put a link to them and didn't publish them on my blog as I understand that they may very well offend someone.

I obviously was much younger and so cannot report what happened at the time. When I got older, and learnt of it, it annoyed me slightly. What annoyed me was that in the wake of post-9/11 anti-Islam sentiment and racist stereotypes forming all around the world likening Muslims to terrorists, something like this was published. That those stereotypes could then be consolidated, based on that it was published in a newspaper.

What annoyed me even more, was the response letter from the Culture Editor at Jyllands-Posten, Flemming Rose. Rose states in an article published in the Washington Post, that "I agree that the freedom to publish things doesn't mean you publish everything. Jyllands-Posten would not publish pornographic images or graphic details of dead bodies..."

As a culture editor, you need to be aware of culture. You need to be aware of customs and controversy and whose toes you are stepping on when you do it. When the New York Times decided they wanted to publish the diplomatic cables from Wikileaks, they were aware of the consequences. Was Jyllands-Posten? Were they aware it would bring about a) controversy and b) violence? Clearly not. I would like to say this is irresponsible journalism, because I honestly do not believe they considered that there would be consequences. Rose also states that their "goal was simply to push back self-imposed limits on expression that seemed to be closing in tighter." I understand, that they wanted to make a point on exercising freedom of expression and doing that with a highly controversial issue would only emphasize their point more. However, they did this at the risk of offending, upsetting and angering those in the Muslim community.

Why? Why would it cause so much controversy, compared to seeing burnt Bibles? Maybe it is just obvious to me, but depictions of Mohammed as a) a God, and b) a terrorist, are just a big no-NO. Why? There is still a lot of discourse on depicting Mohammed in images, and thereby drawing an Idol of Mohammed. That is an issue that remains hot on debate in Islamic culture. I think the issue were the cartoons that showed Mohammed with a bomb or with a weapon, thereby perpetuating the violence in Islam culture stereotype. Rose also mentions that publishing the cartoons meant that they "were integrating you [Muslims] into the Danish tradition of satire because you are part of our society, not strangers".

Using what we did in the lecture, were the cartoons ethical or just in bad taste?

I think they were in awfully bad taste. I think they were published recklessly, and were insensitive considering the political climate. But were they unethical? It honestly depends. There are ethical codes, and according to Rose, these cartoons did. Their intentions were to create rhetoric about freedom of expression and religion. They achieved that, mentions Rose, but at a cost of offending not only a group of people but also an entire religion. In this sense, I believe they were an unethical publication. There was already-growing controversy regarding Islamists and the Muslim religion, and I think this just added fuel to the flame.

RIP Laptop

After two years it's time to say bye to my laptop. My trusty white Macbook has died, leaving me laptop-less and taking ALL my assessment and all my photos and memories. And of course, I didn't back it up. Sorry to anyone who found my blog remotely interesting, and has been wondering where I've been. I didn't die - my laptop did. And ate up all my neatly typed lecture notes, and passwords. Thankfully I've finished lectopia-ing the last three lectures I had before my laptop starting sparking and making weird noises.

Annotated Bibliography

Demidov, Oleg (2012).  Social Networks in International and National Security. In Security Index: A Russian Journal on International Security, 18:1, 23-36.

(Accessed online at: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19934270.2012.634122)

In this article, Oleg Demidov examines the impact that internet technology and social networking in particular have on security. He analyses the possible destabilizing effect technology can have on national security, ultimately questioning whether it is a security risk or not, with reference to the Arab Spring. Demidov defines ‘social networks’ first, rightfully highlighting that it is a broad spectrum, and narrowing it by giving examples, such as Facebook and Google+, and referring to an approved definition of ‘social network’ to state key features sites must contain in order to be a social network. 

Demidov examines the role that Arab Spring played in government reform regarding social media. He states that although freedom and speech were largely supported by the international community, it is unlikely that social networking communities have the power to become a non-state actor, and that an international country would fuel the decline of a government. He outlines the threats that social networking poses, for example, cyber anonymity and terrorist threats online work towards destabilizing security because it is difficult to determine where threats come from. A key factor in his argument is that he provides the reader with strong possible alternatives, and highlights the strengths of governments supporting the use of social networks, for example using Twitter and Facebook as a ‘public announcement system’ to broadcast safety procedures in the event of a national emergency.

Demidov asserts that while social networking communities played an important part in Arab Spring, there is no need to view them as a security threat.

Tejada, C. (2012, May 8) China Expels Al-Jazeera Foreign Correspondent. Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from: http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/05/08/china-expels-al-jazeera-correspondent/

The author and speaker in the video, Carlos Tejada, speaking from Beijing, explains the situation in China at the moment, expanding on information given in the text regarding the expulsion of an Al-Jazeera journalist from China. Tejada explains that although the Chinese government have failed to give a reason, it is largely believed that the journalist’s work on a video regarding black jails in China attributed to her subsequent expulsion. There is an imbedded video of Melissa Chan’s video on black jails on the site, as opposed to on the other two sources. Tejada implies that this is the likely reason, and that officials in China are beginning to worry about foreign media coverage and their content, after Arab Spring, fearing a Jasmine Revolution in China. However, as Tejada is speaking as a journalist currently in China, his knowledge of the subject would likely be more accurate as the extent of the crackdown would be felt, highlighting that rules for foreign media organizations obtaining visas have become stricter. The interviewer states that China has not expelled a foreign journalist since 1998, but neglects to mention what this could imply for the future of foreign journalists in China. Tejada confirms that there is a tenser climate following Chan’s expulsion, by saying that China has already stated that foreign journalists need to obey the rules.

Osnos, E. (2012, May 8). China Expels a Correspondent. The New Yorker Blogs. Retrieved from: http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/evanosnos/2012/05/china-expels-melissa-chan.html

The writer, Evan Osnos, gives an opinion on what he thinks of Melissa Chan’s expulsion from China, stating in his opening sentence that ‘China is moving backwards’. Osnos, like Tejada, is writing from Beijing, but he provides a more in-depth conclusion that this will have on China’s relations with the rest of the world. Moreover, Osnos has been producing journalism and has studied Chinese policy for over fifteen years, and the majority of his work on the New Yorker centres on China, and controversial issues within it. Osnos claims that China’s decision signifies a move backwards, towards ‘Soviet-era strategy’, explaining that China cannot expect to contain or censor foreign journalists by expulsion if they want to maintain their claims that they are a soft power. Moreover, Osnos, as opposed to Tejada and Lee, goes on to quote from the Foreign Correspondent’s Club China, of which Melissa Chan was a secretary this year, which strengthens his argument as it provides us with the picture that the future of journalism in China is dismal. Osnos, like Tejada, says it is most likely due to Chan’s praised work on corruption in China. Osnos also provides more information on foreign journalists having problems with Visas, stating that over the past two years, more than twenty-seven foreign journalists have had a four-month approval wait for their Visas. Osnos asserts that this will hardly present China as an internationally friendly state.

Wen, P. (2012, May 9). China expels al-Jazeera TV journalist. Sydney Morning Herald. Retrieved from: http://www.smh.com.au/world/china-expels-aljazeera-tv-journalist-20120508-1yayj.html
Phillip Wen's article in the Sydney Morning Herald is also of Beijing origin, however, as opposed to the other two articles covering Melissa Chan's expulsion, Wen highlights more the reaction it has generated from agencies such as the Foreign Correspondents Club China, and this article presents us with a stronger sense of censorship regenerating in China, even though, as Wen states, this is the first occurrence for more than a decade.

Although there is no mention of the Communist Party in either Osnos nor Tejada's articles, Wen uses 'the ruling Communist Party' in his article, as opposed to writing 'the Chinese government', or alternatives. The use of the word Communist in that article brings up negative connotations and could give some people the view that China's policy is becoming more hardline and reflecting its previous Communist stance. Although hardline when it comes to human rights activists, China has, up until this point, worked towards promoting an atmosphere less tense than previous years. However, in the context of the recent Arab Spring and the implications that brought to government's, it is understandable that China could fear an uprising, only accentuated by journalists like Chan, whose work in China centred on corruption and Chinese 'black jails', which Wen does not state or imply, although it is made obvious in Tejada and Osnos' articles that this could lead to China's reason. 

Moreover, Wen neglects to cover in depth the effects that this may have in the future, although he mentions it in passing.