Pass 1, Pass 2, Merit 1

Pass 1

TIMELINE OF TECHNOLOGY!!!!

1439    

The Invention of the Printing Press, Allowed for mass printing of documents. Mainly used to print bibles at the time.

1665      

Publication of the first Journals: The Philosophical Journal of the Royal Society.  Most people are still unable to read. Journals published for scientists, inventors and educated people. Therefore further enhancing science.

1731    

First magazine published in London, Published Monthly which shows printing technology has improved. General interests show wider audience so more literacy. Most people still cannot read.

1788    

First major newspaper published in the UK, Technology  is now up to printing daily. This allows people to get info the day after the event.

1876    

The Telephone is Invented, Allows real time communication over long distances. Speeds up commerce.

1912      

Home telephones are available allows public to talk directly to each other.

1922      

BBC Radio Begins Broadcasting. The first fast media, very popular, Transmits information directly into people’s homes, Hitler used this to gain support.

1936      

BBC begins broadcasting Television in the UK, Even more powerful form of mass media. BBC was created to inform, educate and entertain.

1962      

The Internet is invented, Developed by the American military so that if one military base was destroyed the others could contact each other via a communication 'net'

1984      

Cable TV Available in the UK, Allows for a lot more TV channels than the three terrestrial at the time

1985      

1st Mobile Phones available in the UK, Costs around £2000 for half hour talk time bought for business.

1990      

Satellite TV widely available to UK public, High Tech, beamed from satellites 100's of channels.

1992      

First Text message sent today is the most popular form of instant communications. 1.2 billion Text messages sent per week.

1993      

Publicly available World Wide Web. Used to find information, buy/sell

2001      

3G Mobile Phones are Invented Pictures and video, allows members of public to be their own reporters instantly capturing/sharing images anywhere.

2002      

Web 2.0 Emerges, Becomes about social networking

2009      

4G Mobiles available, High speed internet access. Everyone is plugged in to the system

2011      

Web 3.0 begins to emerge integrated internet which finds/organises/arranges things on your behalf.

How Technology Has Changes The News Media?

Technology in the news media is a real important thing in order to get news to many people throughout the world. We depend a great deal on the news to broadcast us information on tons of topics that get us through everyday life. Throughout the years news media technology has changed dramatically. One of the ways that news media technology has changed is through the weather. Weather forecasts are vital in everyday life to plan out are day. Although weather is a tough thing to predict even with new and better technology.

Second news media technology has changed is through how we get financial news. Financial news such as the Stock Market, which many people make their living on. They need to know how their stocks are doing and need the equipment to do on the spot trading and buying. Another way news media technology has changed is through the Internet. Internet technology has also changed a great deal over the past years and many people use the Internet to get their daily news rather watch the news on TV.  Many of years ago going back to 1788 the first major paper was printed in the UK, but when the paper was being made then the only source of information was from people hand written notes and information which probably was incorrect then once printed it could not be changed if any mistakes also then would not be another paper work a week or so to correct themselves for time to make the next paper. Nowadays the information that is put on the internet is updated all the time and newspapers are made daily due the new technology which allows them to do this.

Author: Thomas Purling

Pass 2 

The Public’s side to the G20 protests in London 2009 turned from a controlled protest to a violent protest when a band of demonstrators went to the Bank of England storming a Royal Bank of Scotland branch. Police were armed with riot shields and batons. 

G20 Protestors in London 2009 Picture: Ben Browne

There was an estimated 4,000 people in the financial center of London and most of the protesters were peaceful ones but due to bloody skirmishes broke out while the Police of the Metropolitan Police Force tried to keep the protesters contained around the surrounding area.

A minority of demonstrators seemed determined to cause damage, seeking confrontation as they surged towards police lines.

By about 8pm, running battles between riot police and demonstrators were taking place across London Bridge. Bottles and bricks were thrown.

At one stage, after midday, riot officers and police dogs and horses removed some 20 protesters who had spent a quarter of an hour ransacking an RBS branch, tearing out computers and telephones. To cheers and shouts, they smashed several of the bank's windows, writing "burn a banker" and "scum" in spray paint. Police in riot gear inside the bank tackled protesters trying to climb in through the smashed windows.

Subsequently, at least 10 protesters sitting down in the street close to the Bank of England were left with bloody head wounds after being charged by officers with batons at around 4.30pm. One woman, said to be an Italian student, was carried off unconscious.

The Metropolitan police said 32 people had been arrested. The offences ranged from threatening behaviour and criminal damage to violent disorder; two were arrested for aggravated burglary on the RBS building and one for attempted arson on the branch. One was detained in possession of a class-A drug, while another 12 protesters who had turned up at the protest in a blue armoured personnel carrier were arrested in connection with possession of police uniforms and road traffic offences.

After the charge against the sit-down protest at students, there were complaints that officers had been heavy handed. "When people surrounded RBS, I could understand police tactics," said Jack Bright, 19. "We were sat down, trying to have a peaceful protest, but they started whacking us."

With his head wounds bandaged up by an ITN crew, Finn O'Sullivan, 21, said: "There was a girl in front of me who got hit. Then a bloke got hit and fell to the floor. I was next in line and just remember shields coming down on us. The police were stamping and kicking. I asked them to let me through the line for medical treatment but they said no."

From this report from the Guardian newspaper shows that there are two sides of the story in which the riots played out from the prospective of the Police side to the side of the people actually involved with the riots. The fact that the protest is referred to as a riot shows how what was mean to be a controlled peaceful protest turned into to a uncontrolled situation. From what Jack Bright said earlier in the report shows that his view of the Police’s role was unnecessary violence towards those who were tried to help those in need.  

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/apr/01/g20-summit-protests

Story by Jonathan Benton 

Resources: Matthew Allison, Tom Purling, Ryan Hall-Galley 

Editor: Ben Browne

Merit 1

How new media technology changes the influence of the media.

Recent changes in media technology mean that news nowadays gets to us almost as soon as it happens. This is by the TV and the World Wide Web. A lot of big events that go on are now are live on the TV so people themselves can see what is going on.

For example, each week football scores  used to only been seen once the game had been played on the‘ PINK-UN’ newspaper hours after the matches have been played. Now a days scores are known ASAP as it is going on, on different sporting channels,(BBC FINAL SCORE) internet sights, radio and also now on mobile phone (SKY SPORTS NEWS) apps. This is a wide vary of presentation which makes it better for people to enjoy and its a lot more entertaining for people who can not afford to watch it at the ground, and made it easy for people who are out and who can easily look at there phone for the information.

Not only just for sport media, it’s the same for any news going on in the world.

Anything that happens, it is soon within hours it is being published out on to the TV news channels which are on all the time, also internet which then gets spreads around the world for example as we all know of the London bombing and 911 ,here is a chart for a example of football hooliganism:

Aurthor: Tom Purling

Resources: Matthew Allison, Jonathan Benton , Ryan Hall-Galley

Editor: Ben Browne

Pass 3

Ofcom to investigate Sky News over 'canoe man' email hacking!

An investigation has been launched by Ofcom into the private email accounts being hacked by Sky News.

After Sky had admitted they had accessed the accounts of John Darwin, also known as “canoe man”, his wife Anne and a suspected paedophile earlier this month.

Sky had previously said the evidence found was handed to the Police and the actions done were to the public interest - even though intercepting emails is a prima facie breach of the Computer Misuse Act, to which there is no such defence written in law.

John Ryley, head of Sky News, admitted to Leveson Inquiry they had technically broken the law.
Story by; Jonathan Benton

A bit about Ofcom;

Ofcom is the communications regulator. They regulate the TV and radio sectors, fixed line telecoms, mobiles, postal services, plus the airwaves over which wireless devices operate.

On 1 February 2011 Ofcom completed an internal review and reorganisation. This was designed to reduce significantly expenditure in response to the challenge facing the whole of the public sector.
They make sure that the people of the United Kingdom receive the best they can from their communications services and are protected from scams, sharp practices and offensive material.
Story by; Jonathan Benton

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/what-is-ofcom/

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17810479

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/23/ofcom-sky-news-canoe-man-hacking

Pass 4, Merit 2, Distinction 1

Pass 4 Merit 2 Distinction 1

Evaluating the independence of the media from owners, revenue generators & politicians. 

The world is obsessed with news, scandalous gossip and stories; whether it’s about their favourite celebrity, football team or local church, news sells. But how much of this news portrayed in the media can we trust? Perhaps we’re just reading the opinions or views of that particular company’s owner, wanting to get his views across to the nation; subliminally brainwashing them into thinking that piece of news is the be all and end all.

Most journalists would more than likely enjoy speaking the truth; but without financial clout, they powerless! And like the old saying goes, ‘He who pays the piper calls the tune’

But when it comes to looking at the independence the media has from their revenue generators it paints a fairly similar picture – if you have the money you can pretty much twist and turn any news story into anything you want the public to hear. News Corporation (Rupert Murdoch’s business) had annual full year revenue of $32.8 billion, which is earned primarily from;

-          Advertisers who pay TV channels and newspapers to display their products.

-           The public buying newspapers, watching TV and using the internet.

-           And in this country; the government who charge licensing fees in aid of non -commercial (advertising) public friendly television. (BBC)

It’s quite simple to evaluate a media outlet’s independence from the revenue generator, if a certain product (for this instance a TV show) viewing figures drastically drops, this is likely due to something happening or being said on the show. Now if the TV channel it was broadcasted on has a family entertainment image, it will more than likely cut the show. This is a perfect example that media has very little independence from their revenue generator. The Bill can demonstrate this, for years it was broadcasted week in week out but ITV thought it to be getting too violent so cut it, outraging many die-hard fans. http://www.newscorp.com/Report2010/letter_to_stockholders.html(page 2 of “a letter from Rupert Murdoch” for the 2010 figures)

Media & Politics have always had a history; some even describe it as dog-eat-dog. But there is very little in way of evidence to suggest that media is totally independent of politicians. We’d be absolutely lost if we didn’t have media to keep us informed on day to day happenings in parliament, even the slightest of embarrassing moments for a politician could make interesting reading for us in the general public, so is it any wonder that politicians want to control the media? Well in some countries they do, media outlets are eradicated and journalists find themselves harshly incarcerated for speaking their opinion!

Picture by: Matt Allison

A very well-known example of laws controlling the media occurred last summer in the height of the 2011 super-injunctions controversy; where in a nutshell celebrities, politicians, journalists’ gagging order’s in court were all brought to light and revealed. One particular story I have picked out occurred on April 26 2011; BBC political correspondent Andrew Marr abandoned his super injunction about an extramarital affair with a fellow journalist; Marr dropped his case after discovering he didn’t actually father a child with her, after a DNA test. When asked how he felt about the situations he replied with:                                                            

“Am I embarrassed by it? Yes. Am I uneasy about it? Yes. But at the time there was a crisis in my marriage and I believed there was a  young child involved.
'I also had my own family to think about, and I believed this story was nobody else's business.”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1380546/Andrew-Marr-abandons-injunction-affair-fellow-journalist.html#ixzz1wJUIx9cf

After further reading example of super-injunctions and tight government control on media, I can only conclude that there is little to no independence from politicians.

Evaluating the independence media has from its owners can be a tricky business, this is because different newspapers and TV outlets have built up specific ‘characters’ overtime, usually reporting the same topic – I.E The Sun will print gossip and fabricate the truth, whereas The Guardian will focus mainly on reporting the actual facts of a story and pick up on the main points, not just the ones which are more likely to sell papers, in other words they build up a specific Style & Stance.

Style is what is in a nutshell what I explained in the previous paragraph, different papers reporting different stories aimed and different members of the public (usually the lower middle/working class)

Stance is what political views each one has, whether it’s right wing or left wing.

Owners can influence the style and stance of their media companies to either make more money or express their own views to the nation (as if it’s correct and proper). Major influence on media is definitely a negative thing, demoting free speech, reducing objectivity & most alarmingly – distort the news. A big example of this is media tycoon Rupert Murdoch (pictured above). This is the most powerful man in media today; he owns The Sun, a stake in Sky TV and most of the media outlets in Austrasia. Proving that Murdoch has influence over his media is easy to suspect but hard to prove as he watches he tracks; if his branches put print stories or opinions on stories it could well be his opinion, however it could also be there’s; they could well be trying to self-promote their own careers.

Story by Matthew Allison.

Researches: Ben Browne, Ryan Hall-Galley, Tom Purling.

Edited by Jedward Benton

Pass 5, Merit 3, Distinction 2
The main job of the media is to make interesting stories and articles so the public will want to buy their newspaper to make money. So how do they make their stories interesting? Well they can do this one of two ways, they can either portray the public services to be heroic and how good of a job they are doing or they can put the public services in a bad light and only mention the things which they did were wrong. They could do this by getting the public’s opinion and revolve their story around what the public feels about a particular situation. Having controversial, funny and scandalous stories is what makes the news.

On Friday the 30^th March 2012 Scotland Yard faced a racism scandal after a black man used his mobile phone to record police officers subjecting him to a tirade of abuse in which he was told: "The problem with you is you will always be a nigger". 

In the video it shows a recording of the event which one of the men took and it reveals the abuse which the Police officers gave to the men. Obviously what was said was not acceptable and is discriminative and police brutality but what we need to look at is how the media put this across and what the public’s perception of the public services. From the story alone it will put a bad light on the public services but how the Guardian newspaper put the story across was condescending. They got reports from the men who were the victims to the police brutality, a director of the Newham Monitoring Project and solicitors of the victims. This shows in my opinion that public perceptions of the public services will be negative and respect will be lost due to the event. Having first-hand accounts of events will help the media put across the story they want to put across. The evidence gives the media more proof to their story and will help the media persuading the public to believe the story. In this case study it is hard to have a side of the police officers to defend their case since the evidence is very reliable but the question of the matter is would the story be different if there was no recording of the event or if the victims were ethnic minorities. In my opinion no. I believe this because as I said earlier news can only be news if it is bad or controversial. If the men were arrested and no abuse or brutality was used it would not be made such a big deal about and wouldn’t be a talking point to the public because not all arrests made by the police are plastered over the internet but when the story is ‘saucy’ it will be. Negative and condescending stories towards public services and organisations will always be the highlight of the news. Positive points to an event will never be portrayed as much as the negatives. From the case study used there are no positives to images given to the public services in this. As said earlier it could be due to the fact there is major evidence to give negative images but other stories such as the G20 riots and the recent London riots BBC news and other media companies gave only the negative points to the riots and they were mainly from the view of those who were injured or been ‘attacked’ by the riot police involved.

So using events like the ones I have used above its hard to think the media give a good light on the public services, but the public services get in the media other ways as well. Using public health and informational campaigns such as drink driving, Crimewatch, and press conferences can help put a good light on the public services. Harrogate news did a drink drive campaign in 2011 for the Christmas period. In the article they gave information about the campaign, how many arrested had been made, and how many had been breath tested. From a personal point of view this a good way for the public services having a good light by informing the public what they are doing to prevent deaths and incidents caused due to drink driving. This really has no negative images against the public services. But this might make the public weary of the public services because they would worry about if they are going to be stopped for a breath test and may take into consideration about taking the risk with breaking the law by drink driving or how much they drank the night before.

As an overall sum up of whether or not the media gives positive or negative images to change the perception of the public towards the public services is that it depends on what story or information the media gives about a story or an event. If the story involves police brutality or where people are injured due to the police the perception of the public on the public services is going to be negative and if the stories or information help the public like with drink drive campaigns it will give a positive perception.

http://www.harrogate-news.co.uk/2011/12/06/christmas-drink-drug-drive-campaign-2011-%E2%80%93-update/

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/mar/30/police-racism-black-man-abuse

Story by Jonathan Benton

Resources: Matthew Allison, Tom Purling, Ryan Hall-Galley

Editor: Ben Browne

Pass 6, Merit 4

 Pass 6 

TV Dramas are worldwide coverage programmes that millions of people watch but does this truly show the roles and responsibilities of Public Services?

With any TV drama there comes a time where licensing takes over and the true portrayal of public servants becomes very vague. A perfect example of this would be the start of a new three piece drama called Public Enemies.

It focuses the spotlight solely on the Probation Service and looks into it from the point of view of the offender, the gatekeeper Eddie who has recently left prison after 10 years and his probation officer, Paula, returning from suspension following a crime committed by an offender under her supervision.

Fortunately for me my uncle has recently retired from the probation service and  I asked him what a day in the life  of a probation officer was actually like, and whether or not it mirrors the TV drama or whether the drama aspect of it over powers reality

We watched the three part drama together and afterwards I asked him what he thought and whether Public Enemies really grasped what probation officers do day in and day out.

“I cringed at some of the aspects of the drama e.g. the probation officer colluding with the offender by lying to her senior and taking the offender out for a coffee and cake to celebrate his birthday and portraying a recall as simple as picking up the telephone within her own home after the offender visited her”.

“The drama portrays an offender being able to secure work immediately after release. The offender was seen to secure work straightaway and the work provided was in a public place with female colleagues and mixing with the public”

“If an offender found out my address, turned up at my home and tried to push his way in, I would not hesitate in contacting the police.  A professional boundary has been crossed”

We ended the meeting shortly after but he also said that the worst part of the drama had the be the story surrounding Eddie murdering his wife and becoming gatekeeper at the probation office where women are employed.

Reporter: Ryan Hall-galley

Resources:Thomas Purling, Jonathan Benton, Matthew Allison

Editor: Ben Browne

http://www.london-probation.org.uk/media_enquiries/news/public_enemies.aspx

Merit 4

For this part of my report I will be looking into current case studies of media portrayal of the public service

The London riots have been the most talked about acts of criminal violence since the Brixton riots 30 years earlier and I wanted to see whether the media were in fact portraying the police as heroes for policing the streets or whether they were under the impression that police presence was just adding fuel to the fire. Also did the Police do enough to preserve local businesses who lost hundreds and thousands of pounds?

I Searched through the archives and stumbled across a website named London 24 who seemed to have focused all their attention on interviewing the criminals. And this is what I found.

http://www.london24.com/news/crime/lack_of_confidence_in_london_riots_police_encouraged_others_1_1138804

The vast majority of people interviewed for a study of the causes of the disorder said they believed the “sole trigger” for disturbances in their areas was the perception that the police “could not contain” the scale of rioting in Tottenham, north London, and then across the capital in August.

“Lack of confidence in the police response to the initial riots encouraged people to test reactions in other areas,” the Riots Communities and Victims Panel found.

I believe by pigeonholing the groups for interview questions is sending the wrong message and is giving the Public Services a bad name and by interviewing a certain group you’ll get just one half of a story which is then impossible to conclude, and its articles like these that are harming the perception of the men and women that police our streets day in and day out. It won’t be long before the entire public start to lose faith in our Police force and I’m sure it will happen as long as people/media continue to make scape goats out of our Services.

I took time out to interview the chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation Peter Smyth and many on the ground officers and asked them whether or not they felt they did enough to stop the riots escalating and a lot of those officers felt equipment wernt of high standard.

Almost half (3,859 or 45%) said they suffered fatigue and one in six (1,407, 16%) said they suffered stress. But one in five (1,798, 21%) said they experienced "no ill effects".

Peter Smyth, the federation's chairman, said: "Met bosses must as a matter of urgency ensure that enough properly equipped vehicles are available for deployment.

"The use of so many hire vehicles in particular was staggeringly inappropriate for the role they had to play leaving officers in these vehicles with little projection from projectiles or the rioters themselves.

"All police officers understand the exceptional nature of the riots, which is why so many of us were willing to give 110% during the crisis working for weeks without days off and sleeping on station floors.

"But it is completely unacceptable when a lack of safe equipment left officers at real risk of unnecessary harm during their duties or unable to help colleagues in danger."

Again this is another negative portrayal which goes even higher than on the ground Police Officers I mean how can the public trust the police to protect them when the police are worried the equipment being used may even fail to protect them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-17288268

Again there are also fake portrayals of police officers which you see on a daily basis with the bill re runs and Taggart etc who are all to gung ho into Police chases whether it be on foot or in a car. Again this is a purely for entertainment purposes and although at times they touch on proper police roles it is by far blown out of the water by blown up houses and violent gang attacks and although it all happens it isn’t as cut and dry as the tv dramas show. Firstly you will have to arrest the suspect and with that comes an awful lot of paper work and questioning which could last for days. Let alone the court dates and expenses trials getting the jury it’s a very long drawn out process which could take months to reach a verdict. It also doesn’t really represent the amount of work that the police do and the hours they put in week in and week out.

Its very easy for people to say that they want to become an officer after seeing these programmes and its easy to see why with all the media coverage around it but like I said earlier its all for entertainment.

Reporter: Ryan Hall-galley

Resources:Thomas Purling, Jonathan Benton, Matthew Allison

Editor: Ben Browne