Lecture 9 - News Values

What makes a headline in the news? Why are some stories given more attention than others and seen to be more important news? "If it bleeds it leads" is a quote heard many times to describe common top news stories. What makes people so interested in these stories of war, murder and tragedy? In our week nine lecture we discovered the values of news stories that make a big splash as opposed to a tiny ripple. News values as defined by Wikipedia is 'how much prominence a news story is given by a media outlet, and the attention it is given by the audience'.

News Values:
1. Impact - shock or 'wow' factor
2. Audience identification - interests people
3. Pragmatics - Ethics, practicality, current affairs
4. Source Influence - PR (press release)

These four values seem a good starting point for deciding what story to place at the beginning of TV news or a newspaper. If we look at the headline news for today of the Brisbane Times the two major stories I found were:

1. The ongoing investigation into the murder of Brisbane mother-of-three Allison Baden-Clay
2. The win of Graham Quirk for Brisbane mayor in last weekend's election

The first story fits the quote "If it bleeds it leads" quite perfectly and if we look at its news values it has all four mentioned above. Because it is a murder it carries the 'shock' factor, and audiences identify with it particularly because it has happened here in Brisbane. The investigation has been going on for thirteen days in which police have conducted press releases and kept the story an ongoing affair. The injustice of the killing of a loved mother-of-three is enough to get anyone a little teary.We can certainly see that this story fits with the news values above.

Graham Quirk as the new Brisbane mayor hasn't the 'wow' factor compared to the first story but it is certainly of great importance to the people of Brisbane and a recent affair.

News values have changed and varied over time and were not always those ones shown above. In the lecture we looked at several people's theories as to what makes a story newsworthy. Galtung and Ruge were among the first to come up with a set of values to explain what made headlines. Below are their twelve suggested values.

 

Galtung and Ruge's three hypothesis:

Additivity Hypothesis -  The more factors an event satisfies the higher probability it becomes news

Complementarity Hypothesis - The factors will tend to exclude each other

Exclusion Hypothesis - Events that satsify few or none of the factors will not become news

Golding and Elliot  added their thoughts in 1979 with some interesting additions:

1. Drama
2. Visual attractiveness
3. Entertainment
4. Importance
5. Size
6. Proximity
7. Negativity
8. Brevity
9. Recency
10. Elites
11. Personalities

O'Neill and Harcup have narrowed Galtung and Ruge's intial newsworthiness ideas down to ten suggestions.

Though the 'newsworthiness' of a story has clearly changed over time and even varies from person to person I think we can see some key similarities between them all. Values appear to change rungs on the list rather than appear and disappear entirely. On one of that last lecture slides it was written, 'what do you think is newsworthy?' In my opinion O'Neill and Harcup's version of newsworthiness is the best model and it should be noted that this also is the most modern model I have posted and so relates best to today's news media.

Here is my list in descending order of what I think the news values of today are:

1. Impact/ Magnitude - Who and how many people it effects
2. Importance - Stories that are relevant to the audience
3. Proximity - How close it is to the audience
4. Recency - How recent the story is 
5. The Elite - Concerning the powerful, influential
6. Surprise - A stories shock value
7. Entertainment - How much it entertains
8. Celebrity - Stories about the famour
9. Negativity - Conflict and tragedy
10. Good News - Positive overtones that make the audience feel good

Factual Storytelling: A Change Of Country, A Change Of Life

A Change Of Country, A Change Of Life

I've now been back at home longer than I was away. For the most part I've been very happy ever since returning to Australia and I haven't devoted much thought or time to remembering my five months in India. But looking back on photos I start to miss my Indian home: the people, the places, the food, the adventure. India was by no means an easy place to live, how could it be with over a billion people crammed in like sardines? But it was the story of a lifetime.

I signed up to Lattitude Global Volunteering halfway through Year 12 when exams had my nerves stretched to breaking point. Sitting at my computer day after day I would dream about the adventure that awaited me if I just got myself through my final year of school.

It seemed to take forever, but eventually the day dawned when it was time to leave. My mum and dad kissed me goodbye and before I knew it I was on my own, heading off to one of the poorest, craziest countries in the world. I began to wonder what I'd let myself in for.

When people ask me, “how was India?” I find it very difficult to answer. Everything that could be said about India, the opposite is also true. My trip was both wonderful, and horrible. There were times I laughed so hard I couldn't breathe and there were times I wanted to curl up in a ball and know it was over. It is a country of contrasts. You can walk down the street and see a man as fat as a walrus walking past a man whose body is wasting away to nothing.

I taught English at a middle class school called Olympus High. Every afternoon I would also go and help out at a slum school a few kilometres down the road and these kids had nothing but the borrowed uniforms on their back. In contrast to the kids at Olympus they were skinnier, less confident, and their school books were carried in plastic bags. But their enthusiasm to learn was unparalleled. Though their English was much poorer they were the best students I have seen in any school anywhere in the world. I taught them songs, showed them videos of Australia and its wildlife and every afternoon as I left the little room where I taught them I felt a warmth inside me and a sense of pride for what I was doing. To know that I was helping these kids get an education and make something of themselves was an indescribable feeling. Its the most rewarding thing I've ever done.

 

As the months rolled by I grew to love and hate India almost equally. The pollution was almost unbearable. It clung to my skin, made my eyes yellow, my snot black and my hair fall out. Hygiene was basic and I found the reactions of my friends and family back home funny when I told them I used squat toilets and washed out of a bucket of cold water. There was no water for washing hands, mosquitoes woke me up almost every night, and sometimes it was even too hot to sleep. It was these times I knew I was a long way from home, but I always felt grateful for the experience. To experience life in a much less privileged place, where people never complained about their situation left me feeling quite humbled.

 

I slept in a dormitory with twelve of the boarding children at Olympus High. We woke at six o'clock every morning (except Sundays), got ready for school, had a breakfast of chai and rusk (a sort of bread), attended/taught classes, ate lunch, and finished school for the day. After school the children had sports activities and they spent their evenings studying, only stopping for dinner. The dedication the Indian children showed to their school work would put Aussie kids to shame. Eight and nine year olds spent four to five hours a day doing after-school work. I truly came to love these kids and the staff who ran the dormitory. They are the best of India and what I miss the most.

I can remember wanting to cry when I saw the yellow sands of Australia from my seat on the plane. My country was so pristine and clean. Driving home was surreal. There were no people walking beside the road, no three-wheeled rickshaws or constant beeping horns, no rubbish, and no crazy drivers. The moon was white, not the hazy yellow I had become accustomed to seeing through the smog. I now know how lucky I am to live where I do.

I wish everyone could have as eye-opening experience as I did. It changed my perspective on life forever and gave me an appreciation I never had before. I grew up in India; I left still a child and came back an adult. In India I discovered how strong I really am, what I am capable of and what the world has to offer. Looking back at photos of my time there, it was the most rewarding thing I've ever done and it has helped make me who I am today.

MEAA Code of Ethics

After the Ethics Lecture I was interested to find out more about Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance Code of Ethics. I visited their website: http://www.alliance.org.au/code-of-ethics.html

Below is the Media Alliance Code of Ethics. I think it is very important that all journalists read this as we will be confronted with many ethical issues in our jobs. There are far too many breaches of ethics in advertising, entertainment and storytelling and by reading this we may avoid falling into some of them.

NOTE: The following is pasted directly from the website mentioned above.

Media Alliance Code of Ethics

Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism. Journalists describe society to itself. They convey information, ideas and opinions, a privileged role. They search, disclose, record, question, entertain, suggest and remember. They inform citizens and animate democracy. They give a practical form to freedom of expression. Many journalists work in private enterprise, but all have these public responsibilities. They scrutinise power, but also exercise it, and should be accountable. Accountability engenders trust. Without trust, journalists do not fulfil their public responsibilities. Alliance members engaged in journalism commit themselves to

Honesty
Fairness
Independence
Respect for the rights of others

1.  Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts.  Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis.  Do your utmost  to give a fair opportunity for reply.
2.  Do not place unnecessary emphasis on personal characteristics, including race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, age, sexual orientation, family relationships, religious belief, or physical or intellectual disability.
3.  Aim to attribute information to its source.  Where a source seeks anonymity, do not agree without first considering the source's motives and any alternative attributable source.  Where confidences are accepted,  respect them in all circumstances.
4.  Do not allow personal interest, or any belief, commitment, payment, gift or benefit, to undermine your accuracy, fairness or independence.
5.  Disclose conflicts of interest that affect, or could be seen to affect, the accuracy, fairness or independence of your journalism.  Do not improperly use a journalistic position for personal gain. 
6.  Do not allow advertising or other commercial considerations to undermine accuracy, fairness or independence.
7.  Do your utmost to ensure disclosure of any direct or indirect payment made for interviews, pictures, information or stories.
8.  Use fair, responsible and honest means to obtain material.  Identify yourself and your employer before obtaining any interview for publication or broadcast.  Never exploit a person's vulnerability or ignorance of media practice.
9.  Present pictures and sound which are true and accurate.  Any manipulation likely to mislead should be disclosed.
10.  Do not plagiarise.
11.  Respect private grief and personal privacy.  Journalists have the right to resist compulsion to intrude.
12.  Do your utmost to achieve fair correction of errors.

Guidance Clause
Basic values often need interpretation and sometimes come into conflict. Ethical journalism requires conscientious decision-making in context. Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden.

Lecture 8 - Ethics

Ethics was the topic for this week's lecture and was taken by guest speaker John Harrison. I found this week's lecture particularly fun as it was interactive and involved looking at a lot of different advertisements, both pictures and videos. We were asked to decide on each advertisement whether we thought it was ethical or unethical and whether it was tasteful or tacky. Here were my opinions:

Outdoor 1 - Tasteful, Ethical
Outdoor 2 - Tacky, Unethical - Gender stereotyping
Outdoor 3 - Tacky, Ethical
Outdoor 4 - Tasteful, Ethical
Outdoor 5 - Tacky, Unethical - Not about shoes, very sexual

TV 1 - Tasteful, Ethical - Word 'bloody' made it banned in UK
TV 2 - Tasteful, Ethical
TV 3 - Tacky, Ethical - Banned in NZ because of the word 'bugger'
TV 4 - Tacky, Unethical - Racial stereotypes
TV 5 - Tasteful, Ethical

Overall I would say the advertisement that I had the most problem with was actually TV 4. The comments made by Sam Kekovich stereotyped Australian's in a very offensive way and I find the advertisement both tacky and unethical. Get out of Australia if you're a vegetarian hippy? I am not a vegetarian or hippy but I found those words in particular very unethical.

John Harrison talked about what makes something good or bad? When and how is that decided? There are three ethical theories.

1. Deontology
Judges the morality of an action based on the action's adherence to a rule or rules

2. Consequentialism
Doesn't matter what you do as long as the outcome is 'right'
The end may justify the means
The greatest good for the greatest number

I personally could not agree with this second theory as I believe the way something is done matters a lot. The end does not always justify the means nor is the greatest good for the greatest number make something right. The last theory is the one I agree most with as does John Harrison.

3. Virtue - HIS CHOICE
'Goodness' comes from good habits of character
These habits are virtues eg, courage, justice, temperance, prudence
These are the 'golden means' of behaviour

By using virtues to decide if something is right or wrong I believe we get closest to an outcome that is both ethical and achieved in a good manner. It relies on individual's character to know what is right and wrong, not a set of rules put down. If journalist's and the media use courage, justice, temperance prudence in their judgement the content is most likely to be ethical. Of course the only problem with this is that individual's will have their own opinion as to what 'justice' and other virtues might be but on the whole I thin this is the best of the three theories.

Kony 2012 - Cover The Night

The attention on the Kony 2012 campaign has dropped considerably since its release on 5th March. There has been very little said about it for a while now, even the release of its second video barely made a headline. Tonight though, is the date that has been set by the group Invisible Children to raise as much awareness of their campaign as possible. This time not via the internet, but physically in the form of putting up posters and signs everywhere of 'Kony 2012'.

Will they carry it off? I will be very interested to find out tomorrow morning. I wonder just how many people were convinced to buy the awareness packages they promoted on their two video releases. When I watched the first video I was definitely moved and right on board with them to catch Joseph Kony, but something held me back from going that bit further and purchasing the packages. Was I one of few or one of many?

Today I also watched the second video (above in case you haven't yet!) made by the Invisible Children in which they emphasized a little more on the actual whereabouts of Joseph Kony (which was a criticism from their first video) and what changes were beginning to take place. The big question is of course, are we actually any closer to catching Joseph Kony after all this 'awareness'? In my opinion, not really. Barack Obama may have signed some papers, perhaps more men are being assigned to hunt down  the LRA but this guy is still out there, still free. He has apparently kidnapped over fifty more people since the first video. The second video was good though, addressing some of the criticisms put upon the first one and going into more detail, showing facts, people and plans.

As a journalism student I have found this whole campaign interesting to watch as it unfolds. As has been said before, something of this magnitude has never been done before, using digital media to reach so many people around the world and receiving such a strong response. I wish the Invisible Children all the best with their busy night ahead!!

HOW TO LOSE WEIGHT FAST, through the nose?

Reading the news today I came across one of the latest diet fads to hit the market. Every new method I read or hear about seems crazier than the last but this one just about takes the cake. Eating through a nasal tube! This idea may seem pretty extreme and a little gross but many brides to be are trying this 'crash diet' method to lose 5-10 kg before their big day. Women follow this 'diet' for about 10 days in which they consume a mere 800 calories per day, less than half of what most people should eat in a day!

Basically its just another stupid starvation diet that does more damage than good in the long run. In a world where time is short and people don't have the time or can't be bothered to live a healthy lifestyle these sorts of weight loss methods continue to emerge, each one seeming more ridiculous and more unhealthy than the last.

Have you heard
of these?

The Cabbage Soup diet - Eating nothing but cabbage soup for seven days

Grapefruit diet or Hollywood diet - A high protein, low carb diet that incorporates half a grapefruit with every meal eaten. It is claimed that grapefruit has a fat burning enzyme that will burn calories in high fibre foods. This diet is taken in 12 day intervals, with 2 days off in between.

The Blood Type Diet - This diet claims that according to a person's blood type they need to eat different foods. The evidence behind this is very limited

And finally.... The Lemon Juice diet or Master Cleanse. With this diet no food is allowed to be consumed just herbal tea and lemon water. With a diet like this of course you're gonna lose some weight! Its pure starvation!! Click on the link below to watch Current Affairs expose on this infamous diet used by many Hollywood stars.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7006mQQ0Y0w&feature=player_embedded#!

Lecture 7 - Public Media

Lecture 7 was about the public media with particular emphasis on the two main players in Australia: ABC and SBS. For the first ten years of my life the only TV I ever watched was ABC because that was the only channel we picked up (I lived out in the country). I can still remember the first few weeks when we got the other channels like Ten, WIN, Seven and SBS. My mum used to get so annoyed at all the adds. Over time of course my family gradually began to watch more of the commercialized stuff and nowadays we watch ABC a lot less (though this may also be because I'm no longer a kid!) except the odd science program or Australian Story. I do however believe that the ABC and SBS show far more important material than any of the commercial channels and their value to society is far greater.

In the lecture we discovered that public media's main goal is to serve and engage the public. Because it is not driven by the need to create profit the material it gives us is very different. It allows for minority groups, supports the public and democratic processes and has no other vested interest other than its main goal. One of the big questions raised was, if public media isn't funded by advertisers then where does it get the money to function at all? The answer: it is owned by us, the public!

Now I have heard many people say they never watch ABC or SBS because they find it boring. Maybe for a lot of young people reality tv shows, and American sitcoms are more entertaining but surely there must come a time when everyone gets sick of this sort of stuff and wants something they know is real. I think that  this is what makes public media so special. Because it has no agenda it goes where other media doesn't. It was the ABC that brought us the story of exported cattle that created such an upheaval across the country. When stories like these break, stories that have real meaning and get people up and talking and protesting we can see the importance of public media.

I think it is important to note that while commercial media is all about showing us what we want to see most, public media often shows us what we need to see most. I believe both serve a vital purpose in society and have an important role to play. When I think about the different channels I watch, it is a hefty mix of both types and I enjoy both equally for different reasons. But my respect for the public media channels is much greater and I would love to one day join one of them as a journalist!

The Content Makers

I am happy to admit that I am a Sunrise fan. Almost every morning when I get up I switch on the kettle and switch on the TV to Sunrise while I eat my breakfast. After reading The Content Makers I tried to think what made me watch Sunrise over the Today Show. All I can put it down to really are the presenters. I like Kochi and Mel. I like the way they talk, and what they talk about. They are friendly,at ease on the set and their personalities shine through. It was very interesting to read about the show in The Content Makers, to find out why the show is run as it is. That it wants to make audiences feel included and at home. Well they got me, I fell for it hook, line and sinker.

 

I guess the average Australian isn't thinking about the huge inter-channel wars when they flick through channels each day looking for something to watch. What we choose to watch and why is all about personal taste, deciding what we do and don't like. But companies like Channel 7 and Channel 9 have to take all this on board, and they do on a level I was never really aware of. I was amazed reading The Content Makers at how much thought goes into what is shown. Remote controls rule what we can watch on tv. If too many people flick the button on a show, that show is history. Its seems pretty harsh action but I guess these companies want the 'biggest bang for their buck'.

I found myself feeling sad that Australian documentaries and drama were on the downfall and will possibly be scrapped altogether is current legislation is changed. But thinking about it, do I actually watch any Australian docs or dramas? I admit guiltily, no. Maybe one documentary every few weeks. So I am supporting the decline myself. At the same time I don't like the idea of more cheaply run panel shows, reality shows like Australian Idol. Its got me wondering will there be anything I want to watch on TV in a few years time? Just Sunrise in the morning perhaps? The Content Makers said that most people my age were now on the computer much more than the watching TV and I think one of the reasons is that there really isn't much left on TV that interests my age group anymore.

Below I have written down the first eight news segments of Channel 7 news as told in The Content Makers:

Cross City Tunnel
The drug, ice
Death penalty on drug smuggler in Singapore
Sydney cult leader
Sex shop opening near a school
Bird flu story
Kyoto conference

Which of these am I personally interested in?They all sound relatively interesting to me, so Channel 7 has pretty much hit the nail on the head. They also know what we don't like:

- People turn off the tv if they see blood (no dead bodies)
-People don't want to know just about  the event but what lies underneath it too
-You can't put politicians on tv anymore
-Shows that aren't interactive,  Sunrise is such a success because of interactivity
- Drama is less popular now and it is expensive to produce


I still think its a little freaky that companies can predict what will be news 'hit' and what won't. And is this a good thing? I'm not convinced it is. At the end of the article there was a mention of Q-scores that measure the level of attachment people have for the programs they watch. It starts to feel like these companies are mind-reading us. Where could this lead? Mind-washing? Privacy invasion? Who knows, but I'm not sure I like the way all this is heading.

Hungry for the Hunger Games?

I went and saw the much talked-about movie The Hunger Games on the weekend and thought I' d give my own little review/thoughts on it. As someone who has not read the books I went into the cinemas not really knowing what to expect. Many of my friends have raved about the books so I admit I had fairly high expectations. I was imagining something along the Harry Potter lines, yes that is how much my friends talked it up, but it lacked the spark I find in JK Rowling's creations.

The Hunger Games is set in an imaginary land that is divided into twelve districts. Each year one boy and one girl are chosen from each district to play in the 'hunger games'. This is basically a fight-to-the-death battle watched by all of the nation.

The movie focuses on a teenage girl called Katniss who is the unlucky female contender from the twelfth district. Though the movie is filled with plenty of tension and some interesting themes I found myself unattached to most of the characters (though I did like Katniss) and the plot was predictable. We already know that there can only be one person alive at the end of it, and of course its going to turn out to be Katniss. By the way sorry if I just ruined the ending for anyone who hasn't seen it. I came out feeling like there needed to be something more, some extra twist, or depth, or something. I was told afterwards that it is a series so perhaps the next movie (if there is one) will reveal more.

Overall I enjoyed it but it didn't live up to all the hype I have seen around it.

3 and half stars from me.

Belated Happy Easter to Everyone aswell!! Hope you had a good one :)

Lecture 6 - Commercial Media

 The lecture for Week 6 was all about Commercial Media with emphasis on Australia. We learnt that commercial media  exists so that advertisers can promote their products and the media companies can make a profit on this. I found it interesting to discover which major companies run the commercial media show in Australia. When the names Fairfax, APN, WIN, Nine Entertainment Co., Ten etc came up it was no surprise. I think everyone has heard of these guys. But what did surprised me was how many different kinds of media they produced. For example I always thought of Nine entertainment as the TV channel but the company also dabbles in magazines, digital media and events too!

Commercial media can come in different forms: Subscription (such as Foxtel), Sponsored (Such as Nine) and even subsidized (usually by the government). Its functions are also a combination of commercial, propaganda and social benefits but which functions are emphasized most and least is debatable. Many people believe commercial media, because it is driven by profit, cares little for social benefits. But it also relies heavily on its audience numbers to receive advertising so cannot risk falling out of favour with them. Commercial media must also abide laws set down by Government Agencies to ensure that its content is suitable.

A quote given in the lecture: Comment is free, but fact is sacred

I liked this quote a lot. Anyone can give an opinion or spin a story, but knowing the facts is far more valuable.  In today's world the programs and news shown on commercial media seem to be spiraling ever downwards into the trash can. How much of what we perceive to be fact actually is? How do we know that what we are being told is truth since the companies main goal is to make money?  Bruce discussed this in our lecture, talking about how 'dumbed down' programs are becoming. We get 'Mickey Mouse News' and news 'intended to please' rather than the real stuff but the only plausible reason commercial media would do this is because the audience watches it! There must be a lot of people out there with a hidden love for "A Current Affair" and other trashy news shows. Or maybe it is just very cheap to run.

Here is John McManus opinion: Commercial = Corrupt, lack of quality, profit over-rides social responsibility


I think there is some truth in what John McManus says, though of course he is making a huge generalization. Commercial media is facing some serious challenges in modern society, with less investment from advertisers and greater competition in the market. With less money how can we expect commercial media to produce quality material? And we know that this form of media is driven by profit rather than social gain so the cheaper shows will always win out. That is unless there is a large enough audience and budget worth spending extra money on.

 Less revenue = less investment = less money for quality production = more bought-in content = More repeats of US sitcoms, more reality TV

Not what we want right?!

We ended the lecture with some ideas about how this problem could be solved: Better quality, greater competition, move existing customers over to digital, the government can buy out some of the newspaper