LAST Post!!!!

This post will be containing information and research that I have done for my final feature. Once again, my angle will be "The public's right to know may question the ethics and morals of a journalist."

First of all, there is no right to privacy in the Singapore constitution (Westby, 2004). Questions were raised in parliament with regards to the privacy rights in Singapore as well. If people were to find out that their pictures have been posted without their knowledge, it will be considered as a civil matter and they can ask for it to be removed or sue them for defamation or libel (Asiaone, 2009). My opinion on this matter is that perhaps Singapore does not need such a law as our media does not contain paparazzi that will be constantly watching celebrities or public figure's. Thus, in that sense I feel that Singapore's media is not as bad compared to overseas media.

However, sensationalising news still does take place. This takes place due to news company needing to make some profit. In that sense, Singaporeans, who are affected in these news may find that their privacy is violated as they do not have a choice but to speak with the press. Some even were not aware of their names being published in the papers. An unnamed source of mine was found victim to this as he did not know that his name was to be published for a minor offence that he committed. But he had to face the embarrassment of his family and relatives knowing and even nearly lost his job because of that. So do we need privacy in Singapore? and how far would a journalist go to get their story?

Well, this is my last post before I start on my feature properly. Well, happy graduation everyone. =)

References

1) Asiaone, 2009. S'pore's privacy laws to be reviewed [Online]. Available from: http://www.asiaone.com/Digital/News/Story/A1Story20090120-116000.html (Accessed 26th July 2011).
2) Westby, J.R., 2004. International guide to privacy. American Bar Association. p.124.

Starting to Panic!!!

Well, as stated by my title, I am starting to panic. Not only because of my journalism module but because of all my other modules. All the assignments are crashing together. It feels like end of the world. ok, maybe I'm exaggerating.

Anyway, I've finally gotten hold of a professional and it was no easy feat! I will be tying my feature to a recent event and that will act as a news hook for my feature. I will be using the recent Bosco Wong issue where a journalist took nude photographs of Bosco Wong in his home. I will be comparing a personality's privacy with an ordinary person's privacy. This is because a public figure's life has to be known to the public but the same cannot be said for an ordinary person. So when and where do journalists draw a line?

Well, it's time for me to do more research and come up with my final feature. Till the, Goodbye world!

We are nearly reaching the end!!!!

This week there wasn't any presentation. However, it was consultation time about our final feature which weighs 40%!!! I've decided on the topic and it was well received by my professor. My news angle will be "the public's right to know may question the ethics and morals of a journalist."

I thought I had everything under control until my professor said that we have to search for a professional that can substantiate our feature. Since I always had the luck of getting people to reply me promptly, I did not think much about it. I found a few professionals and emailed them. Well, the reply I received was shocking.

Almost all of them said they were going on an overseas trip. Some were nicer than the others and others were not so nice. Well, I guess this is how life is as a journalist. You won't get very nice replies all the time. I'm not going to stop trying though. The world better watch out for me: Nivitra! XD

Moral Minefields: legal and ethical dilemma

Ethical or not?

Today's presentation was interesting and somewhat similar to my own presentation. But then again, I guess all the topics related to journalism are interconnected. Klara's presentation provided a good summary on the moral minefields of a journalist using the recent Hong Kong star, Bosco Wong’s publication of nude photos on a magazine as a case study.

I guess the legal and ethical dilemma of a journalist always get shady especially when they are deciding between what is the public’s interest or what is interesting to the public. These are two completely different things. As the public’s interest can always mean a flood at orchard, something that is close to their proximity. However, what is interesting to the public may be entertainment or gossips about celebrities that does not affect the public, but entertains them.

Taking celebrity Bosco Wong as an example, He was recently photographed nude at his own home. This is clearly an invasion of privacy, ethically. However, according to the press, they did not enter his home to photograph him, but they zoomed into his home with a professional lens to snap pictures of him. This even caused an uproar amongst media giants of Hong Kong such as TVB as they said that it is completely immoral for the paparazzi to do such an act (Channel News Asia, 2011). Personally, I feel that this is not ethical at all. I guess being a celebrity means you will lose your privacy but does it mean that celebrities cannot even be themselves at home? Does that mean that they have to be constantly afraid that someone is watching them? I, for one, do not want to live such a lifestyle. But without these celebrities, we do not have our entertainment. So I guess we should cut them some slack.

Then, this leads us to ask the question why newspapers or magazines are publishing these stories as their front page news. The main reason would be money. These papers increase their ratings and viewership by publishing these kinds of stories as they know that the public enjoys the gossips especially if it involves high profile figures. I am guilty of it too as even though I feel sorry for these people, I will definitely read the news just to find out what is happening.

So the question we got to ask ourselves as we are going to be future journalists would be how far would we go to cross the line and publish these kinds of stories? When do we say no and where would you draw the line?

References

1) Channel News Asia, 2011. Bosco Wong furious over front page nudes [Online]. Available from: http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/entertainment/view/1135727/1/.html (Accessed 9^th July 2011).

Truth and Objectivity

Definitely do not follow the above cartoon if you want to report the truth

This week’s topic was on truth and objectivity. Calcy and I presented on this topic and I think we did a good job on it. I discussed the factors affecting an individual’s journalistic practice and Calcy carried on illustrating these factors together with the different stages of reporting done by a journalist

Journalists are often referred to as the eyes and the ears of the public. Thus, the role of a journalist is to interpret reality as honestly as possible and to create a commonality of understanding for the public (Tickle, 2001). They have to interpret events honestly without being bias so that the public can receive accurate information. Also, they are needed to create a commonality of understanding and this can be illustrated through the Washington’s Ombudsman David Howard where he was quoted saying that he considers his budget to be ‘niggardly.’ ‘Niggardly’ means to be stingy but the black people in United Sates misinterpreted him as they thought he was using the word ‘nigger’ which is considered a foul word for the black people in the United States costing him his job. Thus, this helps to illustrate how important journalists are and the role they play in the media industry.

Truth and objectivity plays an important role in reporting as well. The truth is defined as in accordance to fact and reality and objectivity is defined as not being influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts (Oxford Dictionary, 2011). Thus, journalists have to report truthfully and objectively so as to not affect the facts of the story. However, truth and objectivity might not be same to everyone. A simple illustration would be China claiming they are a democratic country but when you compare it with the US democracy, they are far from being democratic. However, that is considered to be the truth for the Chinese. Objectivity might sway for an individual especially if it involves someone close to them. Thus, journalists have to be careful when reporting a story.

The factors affecting a journalistic practice would be religious convictions, philosophical convictions, personal integrity, lack of time and technology. Religious convictions and philosophical convictions may hinder factual reporting, show some form of biasness (injecting their own religious and philosophical beliefs) and cause a dilemma on whether to report a story. However, there is a need to check this believes at the door and report what happens (Willis, 2010). Personal integrity is a very important factor for journalists as they must not be tempted to replace news with their own self interest. One such case would be Stephen Glass, a journalist who fabricated all his quotes and stories. After he was caught for his deceit, he was terminated from his job and there was a movie made about him as well. Lack of time will also lead to fabrication of quotes especially since journalists are working in a fast-paced environment trying to meet datelines. Finally technology also causes news to reach the public faster pressurising traditional media journalists. All these factors may cause journalists to be in the gray area when reporting truthfully and objectively.

However, I feel that journalists should see these factors as opportunities to report the truth such as using the technology to get information and visuals as quickly as possible for their news stories. Reporting the truth is hard. The truth is slippery, but with concentration, skills and practice, it is possible to report the truth.

References

1) Oxford dictionary, 2011. Truth [Online]. Available from: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/truth (Accessed 25th June 2011).

2) Oxford dictionary, 2011. Objective [Online]. Available from: http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/objective (Accessed 25th June 2011).

3) Tickle, S., 2001. The Truth, the whole truth, and nothing but…, in Journalism Theory in Practice, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.

4) Willis, J., 2010. The mind of a journalist: how reporters view themselves, their world, and their craft. Sage. Pp. 93-106.

Privacy

Today’s presentation was on privacy and how much is too much. Shasi and Gwen did a short and simple presentation providing adequate examples. Gwen’s youtube video depicted a couple assaulting an investigative journalist which was entertaining and also made us wonder if the journalists did indeed cross boundaries to invade the couples’ privacy. Shasi’s example on the news where the mother accidentally ran over her child created a long and pondering discussion in class that we started to question how far we ourselves as individuals will go to publish this story and where would we draw the invisible line?

There are 4 areas in which privacy can be categorized. They are, intrusion, publication of embarrassing private facts, publication of information that places one in false light and appropriation which is using an individual’s name and photographs without their knowledge (Richards, 2001). However, there are times in which journalists has gone overboard and have violated these area of privacy before. So when is it considered ok to go overboard? Well, clearly, the public always love to know or have more scoops about gossips on issues such as celebrities. If your next door neighbor had a new haircut would you even care? But somehow when it comes to celebrities or high profile people such as politicians, this is huge news and people want to know about it. Aren’t these celebrities also considered people? But journalists are allowed to breech their privacy? Take famous twilight actor for example. Robert Pattinson himself says that he is really shy to the media and he would really like to have some time alone without having to worry what the media has to say about him or the media following him around (Hollywoodgo, 2010). These people do not want the public to know about their personal lives, but somehow, journalists are allowed to breech their privacy. However, there are times where certain issues need to be brought to light especially if these celebrities or politicians are seen as role models to the public. I especially think this is true for politicians as if they have criminal records or other things that may not be very ethical, the public has a right to know. This is because he is running a country and he cannot afford to be corrupted when running a country.

But what about normal people then? Are we allowed to intrude in their privacy? Let me use the same example that we discussed in class of the mother reversing the car and accidentally killing her son. The Newpaper portrayed the story in a completely different light by making it a front page story showing a picture of the mother looking agonized and crying. Clearly The Newpaper did this to sensationalise the story as it is common knowledge in Singapore that The Newpaper is a tabloid paper. When people see the face of the agonizing woman on the front page together with the headlines, they are bound to buy the paper. Then we ask ourselves, hasn’t the woman and her family gone through enough that we have to publish this story? In my opinion, I think it is alright publishing the story but it was not necessary to use images of this woman to boost sales.

In conclusion, I ask back the question when do journalist have to draw a line? Certainly, journalism is a sticky area to work in. I guess it depends on the person’s ethics and sometimes the company’s ethics as well. This is because sometimes, journalists are forced to do things they do not want to. Well, I must start asking myself if I really want to enter this competitive and sticky field again. I still think I might to get my adrenaline pumping though! ;)

Reference

1) Hollywoodgo, 2010. Robert Pattison Debuts Short Hair On Ellen [Online]. Available from: http://www.hollywoodgo.com/celebrity-gossip/robert-pattison-debuts-short-hair-on-ellen-15735/ (Accessed 24^th June 2011).

2) Richards, I., 2001. ‘Public Interest, Private Lives’, Journalism Theory in Practice, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne.

Journalism and its negotiation of online, the blogosphere and social media

Or is it not?

Twitter, Facebook, blogger, youtube, well, you name it! It’s the era where social media platforms are booming currently. This is probably the reason why I decided to report on this week’s seminar and I definitely paid extra attention to the seminar as well. Vanessa and Roslyn did a great job with the presentation highlighting all aspects of the journalism industry and not just about social media platforms. Great video too guys!

Like I mentioned earlier, social media platforms are becoming more and more prominent in practically everyone’s daily lives. Take me for example, I did not have Facebook until about a year ago which was not even created by me but a friend of mine. Anyway, the point is, now I am hooked to it that I have to check my Facebook page every day. In fact, an average user spends more than 55 minutes per day on Facebook itself (aguntuk, 2010). Thus, it makes more sense for news to appear online or via these social media sites first before it appears on traditional media. This is also because these websites are mobile that when someone is at a spot where important information or events take place, they can immediately tweet or post in on their page for their friends to see it. It may not be the full story, but at least the summary of it appears first before the detailed report which will appear in the traditional media later or the next day. I guess this is why we have twitter and Facebook pages for The Straits Times as well.

But then again, with the rise in social media platforms, more and more people are able to post anything that credibility becomes a problem as well. People are doubtful about the credibility of certain news being spread by social media platforms but they are able to distinguish the real and the fake ones after some time (Catillo, et al, 2011). This is because, people do not simply believe what they read. They are bound to discuss it with their friends who will also probably help to validate if the information is true. Also, this could be a reason why people follow or like news web pages as they are able to receive information, credible information from these sites, even if it is a summarised version. Well, maybe it’s time for me to get twitter as well. What do you think?

References

1) Aguntuk, 2010. People Use Facebook 44% And Twitter 29% For Social Sharing [Online]. Available from: http://thetechjournal.com/internet/social-community/people-use-facebook-44-and-twitter-29-for-social-sharing.xhtml (Accessed 9th June 2011).

2) Castillo, C., et al., 2011. Information Credibility on Twitter [Online]. Available from: http://www.www2011india.com/proceeding/proceedings/p675.pdf (Accessed 9th June 2011).