Weekly New Digital Media - 14.12.16 (28)

Twitter U-turns over banning white nationalist

                             

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/12/twitter-u-turn-banning-white-nationalist-richard-b-spencer-alt-right 

Summary: Twitter has reinstated the account of Richard B Spencer, a self-styled white nationalist leader who was suspended from the service in the wake of a much publicised crackdown on hateful conduct. Spencer’s account was initially suspended on 15 November, as part of a sweeping move against leaders of the “alt-right”, a far-right movement which has been resurgent in America since the election of Donald Trump. Within the same day that B Spencer was suspended Twitter had announced new safety tools on its social network, including the ability to more easily report hateful conduct. It had also announced changes in how it trained its moderators to enforce the policies.  However, it appears that Twitter suspended Spencer for other reasons. Twitter sent the Guardian a copy of the email the company sent to the white nationalist activist, which suggests that Spencer was banned instead for running multiple accounts with too much overlap. Twitter spokesperson said: “Our rules explicitly prohibit creating multiple accounts with overlapping uses. When we temporarily suspend multiple accounts for this violation, the account owner can designate one account for reinstatement.” But later on, his account was later reactivated and re-verified. 

[] the Twitter Rules prohibit violent threats, harassment, hateful conduct and multiple account abuse, and we will take action on accounts violating those policies.”

My opinion: Audiences are very active on social media especially, they comment, like share and re-tweet a lot and that can be seen as an advantage. Twitter is the biggest social media where audience put out their views more than any other sites, this can be from politics, to gossips about people. Being able to spot things is being more easier than ever, people are able to report other twitter accounts for various of reasons and twitter does respond back unlike Facebook. 

Weekly New Digital Media - 14.12.16 (27)

Fake news could affect next UK election, warns Channel 4 executive

                                    https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/13/fake-news-could-affect-next-uk-election-warns-channel-4-executive 

Summary: A top Channel 4 executive has warned that fake news could affect the next UK election, and urged the UK government to step in if Facebook and other internet firms do not do more to tackle the problem. Dan Brooke suggested the problem could become equally serious in the UK, and companies such as Google and Facebook were trying to avoid taking responsibility. Dan Brooke said “Something must be done. So I’ll say to social media players today: with your power comes responsibility. Much … greater … responsibility than you have yet shown. They claim they are technology companies … not media companies … and therefore that the regulation of content is not their responsibility.”Google and Facebook have said they are working on ways to eliminate fake news or stop it spreading, and have already taken steps such as cutting off ad revenue to some sites identified as sources of completely made up stories. However, Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has repeatedly rejected the “crazy idea” that they affected the US election.

[]  Companies did not do more they should be made subject to regulation by the government, which has said it is looking into fake news. Channel 4 and other UK broadcasters are required by law to follow rules on accuracy and impartiality. 

My opinion: Fake news needs to be under control, and seeing that major institution understand and realise that fake news to be under control and Facebook needs to manage this as is mostly appearing on social media like Facebook. In my opinion companies such as Google and Facebook were trying to avoid taking responsibility, even though majority of the fake news happens.. “In short, the worry is that social media is fiddling with fake news while democracy burns.” - Dan Brooke

NDM News: Globalisation and fake news

The Guardian & the global problem of fake news

1) Read this Guardian feature - Fake news: an insidious trend that's fast becoming a global problem 

2) What similarities do you notice between the different countries outlined in the article and their problems with fake news?
The countries that were involved in this article were Germany, France, Italy, China, Brazil, Australia, and India, all these countries have a problem with fake news and it is a growing problem, they are trying to find a way to tackle them but they are different strategy. The German political mainstream is getting increasingly nervous about the effect that the rise of fake news might have on federal elections next autumn. Fake news and Russian interference – either by influencing fake news sites, or by hacking or misinformation – are viewed as a serious threat to the democratic process, particularly since the US presidential elections. France has had a sharp increase in the readership of alternative, far-right sites, blogs and social media operations. Promoting views including anti-immigration, nativism and ultra-nationalism, these sites are run independently, rather than by a political party. But they feed into a mood of distrust of the traditional media, both on the far right and the far left. 
With each of the stories that are boradcasted in  each of the countries are fake news but audiences do not realise that they are, these stories have caused audiences to react in different ways but it has be done in a way to cause a lot of distribution within the days of political elections 

3) Is fake news an inevitable consequence of the "culture of freedom and innovation" that the internet has brought with it? Is there a way to stop it?
In my opinion, i don't think there is a way to stop it because nobody can control audiences and what they write because it can be seen as taking away their freedom of speech. There is always going to be fake news told and braodcasted, this is because people want reactions or some audiences wouldn't question what they read so things will get posted anyway.Fake news can be created especially within the US presidential elections so that people could persuade a wider audience to believe what they want and to be influenced by their decisions, as some audiences are still seen as passive. People who post fake news know they will get people clicking on their sites, no matter what, it will still help them gain money through it - they don't actually care if audiences are reading the right or wrong information. 

New York Times and the creation of fake news

1) Read this New York Times feature - Inside a Fake News Sausage Factory: ‘This Is All About Income’

2) Which fake news stories were particularly successful for Beqa Latsabidze, the 22-year-old student in Tbilisi, Georgia, who tried to make money from web articles on Trump? 
So successful was the formula that others in Georgia and other faraway lands joined in, too, including Nika Kurdadze, a college acquaintance of Mr. Latsabidze’s who set up his own pro-Trump site, newsbreakshere.com. Its recent offerings included a fake report headlined: “Stop it Liberals…Hillary Lost the Popular Vote by Several Million. Here’s Why.” That story, like most of Mr. Latsabidze’s work, was pilfered from the web .A lot of that was conservative readers who see it picked up on other sites and believe it,” some didn't even read the actual article but they're just reacting to the headline. 

3) How much can Facebook and Google be blamed for this global rise in fake news?
I think that Facebook and Google are to blame for this global rise in fake news. This is because they do notice that there is a lot of fake news being posted but yet they haven't tackled the issue, they should be able to monitor what their audiences (especially facebook) are posting up, and either take it down and give them a warning about posting fake news. They should be able to automatically notice fake news and prevent it from being posted up.These institutions are very big, they have the money and the knowledge to control this issue if they really wanted to. 

Globalisation: taking it further

Media Magazine: Globalisation case study

Go to our Media Magazine archive and click on MM47 - the case study issue. You need to find page 31 and the Google Glass feature: a case study in Globalisation.

Read the article and answer the following questions:

1) Why was Google Glass controversial?

Google Glass is controversial because the fact that this glass could record anything and everything that it wanted, made a lot of people intimated and felt frightened - this was something that not many users wanted to be a part of. It also bought up a lot of discussion about whether or not this should be aloud due to a lot of users then becoming disconnected with the 'real world', this could be through the engagement between conversations that they have with each other, because of the uncertainty that the person you're talking to is actually paying attention to you and isn't preoccupied with surfing the net. Some of the dialogue regarding Glass and its release could be viewed as both moral and techno-panics.

2) What are the positive elements to Globalisation that the article highlights?

The positives that come along to globalisation, is that the world becomes more accessible, and people are enriched by getting to know and understand the development of technology much better. In addition, the access to information can enhance not only for people to make informed decision but even the democratic process. This also increases choice and opportunities empower people. 

3) What are potential negatives to Globalisation?

One of the negatives that comes along to Globalisation through the Google Glass is the concentration of ownership, and the possibility that smaller companies have little or no hope if staking a claim on the global markets as they wont be able to compete. This then also contradicts the point of having choice, because there are only a limited number of companies that dominate the global market, and in the main, only distribute the majority of the worlds wealth amongst themselves.

4) What is a techno-panic? How does it link to moral panics?

Techno-panic is a moral panic that centres around the fears regarding a specific contemporary technology. It is linked to moral panic because instead of putting fear on the people about issues, this is the fear of technologies. 

5) What is your opinion on the privacy debate and major corporations being able to access large quantities of personal data?

In my opinion, I don't think it is right for companies/major corporations to be able to access large quantities of personal data, this is because it supports the theory of the status quo, it reinforces that the media is in control all of the time, nationally and globally. The point of privacy means that nobody can look at it, not even the major corporations despite the fact that they have the power to do so. If corporations and the media did want to access large quantities of personal data then they shouldn't make the users feel like they are part of them. 

However, I do understand that there could be situations were major corporations would need to intrude/invade into our privacy when there is a serious situation going on and if someone is at risk/harm then I would understand - but other than that, I really don't think that major corporation should be able to access large quantities of our personal data. 

Media Factsheet: Globalisation and capitalism

Go to our Media Factsheet archive on the Media Shared drive and open Factsheet 92: Globalisation. Our Media Factsheet archive is on the Media Shared drive: M:\Resources\A Level\Media Factsheets

Read the Factsheet and complete the following questions/tasks:

1) Who coined the phrase 'a global village' and what multinational companies illustrate this?

McLuhan coined the phrase 'a global village' where it allows us to understand an connect with other culture of the world which is a positive. A negative of 'global village' is that it can help lose your own identity/culture if we are too engrossed. Coca-Cola are one of the multinational corporations. 

2) What role does Slavoj Zizek suggest the media plays in global capitalism? How can you link this to our previous work on Marxism and Hegemony? 

He argues that the media reinforces and naturalises the ideology that making money is the right way of conducting businesses, but at the same time allows people to feel less guilty about how these goods are produced. This can be linked to hegemony because it encourages the differences between the social classes, although Zikek looks at recent changes in the methods of marketing used by multinational corporations and business who are intent upon developing , while exploiting, the increased desire among the liberal classes in the West to ‘do something’ about saving the endangered planet and helping the world’s poor. This can be also linked to Marxism because the example of the campaign for Starbucks reinforces the view of Marxism, as audiences are active and they play a role in the worlds capitalism. 

3) What does 'capitalism with a conscience' mean? 

Slavoj Zizek says that global media has raised awareness about social issues but agrees that in order to sustain Western capitalist dominance, the marketing campaigns have constructed capitalism with a conscience. 

4) What is the (PRODUCT) RED campaign? 

This campaign was founded in 2006 by frontman and activist Bono to engage the private sector to rase awareness and funds to help eliminate AIDS in Africa. The global fund to fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria is recipient of product red money but product red not a product in itself, rather than it is a brand licensed to partner companies such as Nike, American Express (UK) Apple Inc, Starbucks, Converse, Penguin Classics (UK & international, Emporio Armani etc. 

5) Based on what you've read in the Factsheet, what is YOUR opinion of the (PRODUCT) RED brand? Is it a positive force helping to fight AIDS in Africa or a cynical attempt to make multinational companies look more ethical than they actually are? 

In my opinion, Product red is definity a good campaign to get involved with and help raise awareness about to those in needs. Although in my opinion, I think it is a way for multinational companies to look more ethical than they actually are, in a way for me, it shows that they are trying to prove to everyone what good things they are doing but it is just for show to show their customers and to the rest of the world. 

NDM: Globalisation

One of the topics that we need to cover in A2 Media is Globalisation - which has huge relevance to digital media, news and beyond.

You should have read the notes on Globalisation in class - the handout is here if you need an electronic copy.

Globalisation and news: blog task

Having discussed these issues in class in relation to our news case study, you now need to answer the following questions on your blog:

1) Is our news influenced by American cultural imperialism? Give some examples arguing for or against this perspective.
Cultural imperialism is often when theres a cultural influence but also their dominant ideologies and values are represented on other countries. I believe that UK news is heavily included by American culture, this is because we get a lot of our resources and stories from there. I think without noticing it, from how we present our news to the stories we share are americanised. An example of this through American's presidential elections - the UK news became very similar to how America does their news outlets as well as the information they were sharing. 

2) Has the increased globalisation of news improved the audience experience? How? Why?
In my opinion, I think that the increased globalisation of news has improve the audiences experience because audiences are able to gain news worldwide and its very accessible for them to do so. This can be news that is suitable for audiences - news provided in their own language or from there hometown - through globalisation this has happened. In addition, by having this increase means that audiences are able to see news differently and make their own judgements on news, in terms of how different stories are represented and what stories are shown. 

3) Has globalisation benefited or damaged major news institutions? How? Why?
I believe that globalisation benefits major news institutions rather than damage them. I believe this because it allows major institutions become well known globally and it could possibly bring them more connections, in terms of the resources they gain and how they may represent themselves in the countries that they want to become well known. Although a damage for this can be that audiences see that major institutions are just branding their organisation without any good intention for the country itself. 

Weekly New Digital Media - 7.12.16 (26)

Facebook reportedly testing new tool to combat fake news 

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/06/facebook-tool-fake-news-rank-misleading-language-data-collecting 

Summary: Facebook appears to be testing a tool designed to help it identify and hide “fake news” on the social network, in an attempt to quell increasingly vocal criticism of its role in spreading untruths. The tool, reported by at least three separate Facebook users on Twitter, asks readers to rank on a scale of one to five the extent to which they think a link’s title “uses misleading language”. The articles in question were from reliable sources: Rolling Stone magazine, the Philadelphia Inquirer, and Chortle, a news site which reports on comedy. It isn’t clear how Facebook intends to act on the data it is collecting, or whether it intends to act at all. Misleading link text is certainly a part of the fake news problem on the social network, as evidenced by the two misleading adverts that accompanied Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg’s 18 November post about fake news.

[] Almost 60% of social media shares come from users who never clicked the link, implying that the headline drives discussion and sharing far more than the content of an article.

My opinion: Fake news is getting out of hand, it is being increasingly important to owners of social media and audiences who get involved into fake news. Interestingly, fake news is mainly on social media where audiences themselves are interactive and active, audiences are pushing on this and making it harder for social networkers to control. But it is a bit silly of Facebook using this tool that is explained in the article above because personally, i understand how it can tackle fake news that comes in their social network sites. It could make users think twice and think about what they read but personally, I don't really think it will stop fake news to be created. 

Weekly New Digital Media - 7.12.16 (25)

James Murdoch involved in News International email deletion, court told

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/dec/05/james-murdoch-involved-news-international-email-deletion-high-court-phone-hacking 

Summary: This article explains that James Murdoch was personally involved in authorising the deletion of emails at News International in early 2010 when the phone-hacking scandal was taking off, it has been alleged in the high court. David Sherborne claimed on Monday there were documents, emails and meeting agendas that showed senior executives including Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks pursued an email deletion policy that removed “emails that could be unhelpful in future litigation in which News International could be a defendant”. Part of the evidence presented includes an email sent in August 2010 by Andrew Hickey, who was the CIO of News International, to Jon Chapman, an in-house lawyer at the company, which references both Brooks and Murdoch, saying Murdoch wanted to “draw a line” under the organisation’s time in its Wapping HQ prior to 2010. Andrew Green QC, acting for News Group Newspapers, a News UK subsidiary, said it had previously provided a “non-admission” concerning the email deletion programme, but would be prepared to set out the position again given the extent of the allegations, in particular their relation to the Sun.

[] High court hears claim made on behalf of 17 people suing publisher of the News of the World and Sun over alleged phone hacking.
[] Murdoch was executive chairman of News International between 2007 and 2012. He is now chairman of the UK broadcaster Sky.

My opinion: This article, supports pluralists views about news does question and expose the powerful. The phone hacking scandals have been reported in 2010, and the fact that 6 years later, there are some links/evidence to this scandal can show that things in the media industry doesn't go away that easily, and people can be always caught. Despite the fact, of how big the newspapers are, they will still receive their consequence for what they were involved in and the deletion of emails. Although seeing these scandals happen with a lot of empowered people in the industry can make them feel like these things are a "norm" to them and shows that they don't really worry about what bad decisions/things they are doing because being powerful would save them from everything, but when things come out, it should challenge and make them rethink that some part of the media and audience can be in more of power than they think. 

Weekly New Digital Media - 30.11.16 (24)

The Sun spent £96,000 on poster backing Brexit

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/29/the-sun-spending-poster-backing-brexit-leave-campaign

Summary: The Sun spent more than £96,000 publishing a pullout poster backing Brexit, forcing its parent company, News Group Newspaper (NGN) to register as an official leave campaign group with the Electoral Commission. The headline on this newspaper was published just a week before the referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU. Editorially the paper was one of the most vocal backers of leaving the EU, but the double-page spread fell under the Electoral Commission’s rules regulating campaign spending because it was designed to be displayed, even though the money was reported as a payment from NGN to itself. A spokesman for NGN said: “As part of its campaign for Brexit the Sun ran a pullout poster. In accordance with Electoral Commission guidelines it registered as a participant and has declared the cost.” 

[] The cost of the poster made NGN one of the largest spenders among 48 groups who had their campaign finances revealed by the Electoral Commission on Tuesday, all but two of which spent under £250,000. The remaining 28 groups who spent more, including the official leave and remain campaigns 

[] BeLeave received £625,000 in three payments from Vote Leave on 14, 17 and 23 June, while Veterans for Britain received £100,000 in May. The bulk of spending by both groups went on targeted digital advertising across social media and other outlets.

[] Facebook was also listed as one of the main recipients of spending, with direct payments to the social media firm totalling almost £340,000 out of just under £3m spent on advertising.

 My Opinion: I think that the newspapers headline was very bold and attractive to the audiences which could have possibly persuaded some audiences mind on the vote. To spend a lot of money on the newspaper headline is very high, to which i personally did not expect. 

Weekly New Digital Media - 30.11.16 (23)

Facebook doesn't need to ban fake news to fight it

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/25/facebook-fake-news-fight-mark-zuckerberg

Summary: Mark Zuckerberg’s social media site doesn’t have to become a censor to help tackle false stories. It can do a lot by helping its own users with context. Ev Williams, the co-founder of Twitter, Blogger and Medium, posted his own example a few days later: links, claiming to be from ESPN and CNN, to stories that implying that Tiger Woods had died and Donald Trump had been “disqualified”, right next to the Facebook chief executive’s post. There’s little agreement on where to draw the line. Open questions like this explain why many are wary of pushing Facebook to “take action” against fake news. “Do we really want Facebook exercising this sort of top-down power to determine what is true or false?” asks Politico’s Jack Shafer. “Wouldn’t we be revolted if one company owned all the newsstands and decided what was proper and improper reading fare?” the company’s goals are to maximise time spent on site, to try and make sure readers come back every day and continue to share posts, engage with content, and, ultimately, click on the adverts that have made the social network the fifth largest company in the world by market cap.

Facebook could do to help deal not with fake news, but with the negative effects it has on our society: de-emphasise who shared a story into your timeline, instead branding it with the logo and name of the publication itself, and encourage readers to, well, read, before or instead of liking, sharing and commenting. Doing so might not be great for Facebook’s bottom line, of course. The site would be less “sticky”, users would be more likely to click away and not come back, and the amount of sharing would drop. 

[] Mark Zuckerberg has finally said that Facebook will take it seriously. “Our goal is to connect people with the stories they find most meaningful, and we know people want accurate information,” 
[] 10 months leading up to the election, the top 20 fake news articles being shared on Facebook skyrocketed from 3 million “shares, reactions, and comments” to nearly 9 million, while mainstream media articles declined from 12 million shares, reactions, and comments in February to just 7.3 million by Election Day

My Opinion: I believe that audiences should always be active in terms of what they read and share, we should all check twice if the information is real by going on other sources and seeing if a similar information have been said. Social media can never be trusted as a lot of people give away false news to generate the whole point of media as "dumping down" and for Andrew Keens quote to be true "web pages and blogs are like million monkeys typing nonsense" in this case it is also on social media accounts. From now, I think Facebook will be impacted by whatever Mark Zuckerberg decides to do next and if the audiences would react. 

Gone Too Far; Film Review + Argument

Write your own original 300 word review of the film.

“Gone Too Far” is a cultural movie that hits millions to laugh. This low budget movie shows the cross culture and invites audiences to accept their culture. The scriptwriter, Bola Agbaje and the director of the movie Destiny Ekharaga have created a comedy movie that’s acted out in Peckham where the writer herself grew up in.

The movie revolves around a typical teenager (“Yemi”) living in south London, trying to fit in with the society and everyone else – listening to the music everyone talks about, wearing clothes that won’t cause double looks from society. By having a mother in the film that shows a reflection of how a Nigerian mother can be like, the humour within this role does allow the audience to be affectionate towards the character. However things do get shaken up when his Nigerian bother (“Ikudayisi”) comes to stay, adventurously Ikusaysisi decides to rock up with his sock-and-sandals and a clash in clothing, causes the two brothers to have a long night ahead of them that’s filled with lots of danger and excitement that they face together. In addition the audiences were able to build personal relationships and identity both directly and in directly from the film.

Having this comedy, drama film based around London allows audience to particularly feel involved and engaged with the movie through the use of language spoken and the references made throughout the film. This film was brilliantly made, which it went to an extent that audience were so intrigued with the different relationships between the characters in the film that while watching the movie, comments had to be made! It was a film where we as the audience had something to talk about. This comedy, drama film, had a strong message at the end that audience could accept their own culture as well show it off.

6. "This house believes that films featuring ethnic minorities should only be produced by those who have the ethnic identity being represented."

In my opinion, I believe that films featuring ethnic minorities should only be produced by those who have the ethnic identity being represented, because the film would represent the true identity and wouldn’t come as unrealistic or not true by audience, as also it would be more easier for audiences to create personal identities within the film because it would be a true representation of identity. Films that feature ethnic minorities should only be produced by those who have the ethnic identity, as they would understand the situation, the culture but the benefits and struggles that come along with the background. I strongly believe that no other person with a different ethnic background can truly represent other ethnic identity that is being represented in films as much as they believe they can just because they simply wouldn’t understand or be able to pull it off as effectively as those who are.

Marxism & Pluralism - homework essay

"The development of new/digital media means the audiences is more powerful in terms of consumption and production. Discuss the arguments for and against this view." 

New and Digital media is a powerful source, it is becoming more advanced than ever. Through the internet, it is changing and controlling us as audiences/users, within this, they are both drawbacks and positives out of this. By the development of new and digital could mean that audiences are powerful in terms of consumption and productions but it could also mean that audiences aren't, this is what i will be discussing. 

A Marxist perspective would argue that the so-called “information revolution” has done little to benefit audiences or to subvert the established power structures in society. Far from being a “great leveller” (Krotoski, 2012) as many have claimed, it has merely helped to reinforce the status quo by promoting dominant ideologies. The most popular news website in the UK by a considerable margin is the ‘Mail Online’, which receives more than 8 million hits every month and is continuing to expand rapidly – with forecasts that it will make £100 million or more in digital revenues in the next three years. Similar to its tabloid print edition, the website takes a Conservative, right-wing perspective on key issues around gender, sexuality and race and audiences appear to passively accept what the Marxist theorist, Gramsci, called a hegemonic view. When one of their chief columnists, Jan Moir, wrote a homophobic article about the death of Stephen Gately in 2009 there were Twitter and Facebook protests but, ultimately, they did not change the editorial direction of the gatekeepers controlling the newspaper.

As a pluralists view, they would believe the audiences is more powerful in terms of consumption and production due to the development of new and digital media. Audiences are seen as capable of manipulating the media in variety of ways according to their proper need and dispositions, it will be enabling them to 'conform, accommodate, challenge or reject' (Gurevich et al) this theory suggest that the classless society can do this. An example of this is through UGC. Through the use of new and digital media, audiences are becoming more active, they are willing to challenge the powerful, in terms of UGC, audiences are using social media sites such as Twitter, and using trends and hashtags to raise awareness about issues to a wider audiences; audiences are taking control and being powerful to how they are questioning the powerful. The audiences are using new and digital media to their advantage, this illustrates that are audiences are more powerful in terms of consumption and production. 

Although this could be again disagreed by a Marxists, as they believe that even though audiences are in power; they're not. Marist tend to to reinforce the role of media in the reproduction of the status quo. Gramsci’s theory of hegemony would reinforce this as it states that dominant ‘media conglomerates’ feed audiences the necessary information.  It suggests that audiences are not empowered through the development of new and digital media as the dominate and higher class "rule and control" the media. An example of this, is the Arab Spring revolution in 2011, this was a protest for democratisation that that agreed with the pluralists views, as audiences took to Twitter to voice their opinions about this. However, an Marxists would argue that even though audiences had done a protest and took to social media to voice their opinion, no changed happen, the result of all the audiences taking part, nothing changed in the media. So even though audience believed they were in power in terms of consumption and production, they weren't because their actions didn't lead in anything. The media/ dominate social class will always be powerful and can not be over ruled. 

On the other hand, a pluralist perspective would argue that the development of new and digital media is an ‘empowering tool… an exciting and revolutionary prospect" (Al Gore). Active audiences have made sure they are in power through citizen journalism. Citizen journalism is when an ordinary member of the public comes up with a content and publishes it other viewers to see, through this it allows real footage to the audiences to see from a persons perspective that has been in the situation themselves and felt it, and it does show the rawness to it, but when it is by professional journalists themselves, the audiences are not to be made unconscious to distinguish reality from a situation (Baudrillard :hyper-reality) through the words and stories of the media that professional journalisms do make it feel like, there is a different feel to it as it would be over produced and wouldn't meet to the audiences emotions rather than when its done by original people themselves. An example of this is when the first UGC was created, it was the example of Rodney King, and African american was that was speeding, four police men were really abusive towards him, the police men battering Rodney King was caught on camera by an onlooker. From this raw footage it showed the racism from the police officers towards a black african, which now people more opened about showing and exposing professionals, they are challenging them and exposing them to a wider audiences. This reinforces that audiences are becoming more powerful in terms of consumptions and production through the developments of new and digital media. 

However, marxists perspective would reinforce the theory of the hypodermic needle, they would reinforce that audiences are drip fed with information that they don't question nor think if its true or not. This is shown with the developments of online newspapers, since they are online and highly established, it can lead to consumers of the internet to be exploited with stories that are either false or really biased, this is also shown on social media networks. Additionally, these Marxists believe that a "a minority of media producers always serve a majority of consumers" (Pareto's Law), this is due to the exploitation of their power. Audiences are now becoming powerless as they have no say or control of media producers, who have the ability to mediate the content and change it for the consumers and show what they want to see. Like Alain De Botton said "how do we get popular news to be the most important"  a marxists would argue that us audience are to blame in this case, its because we prefer the softer news or non-political news because it would grab our attention more than the other, we'd like to see more of the negative news (Galtung & Ruge's.) This all makes me realise that audience are not empowered but news are in control more than anything. 

A pluralists would argue that institutions would allow us as audiences be more involved in the media and news especially, the option of online comments under some news issues allow the audiences to have their point and opinion across to the professionals but other viewers to engaged themselves with and have a discussion with, if they agree or disagree. This supports the pluralists view about how the role of media is promoting freedom of speech. 

In conclusion, I believe that the developments of new and digital media that are becoming discovered by the audiences are becoming more advanced and intistution are adjusting to them, but audiences are slowly becoming powerful in terms of consumptions and production. 

_________________

Marxism & Pluralism: Alain de Botton on the news

1) To what extent do you agree with Alain de Botton's views on the News?
I do agree with Alain de Botton in terms of news being bias, where news don't have views themselves, as they are feeding us the information, we as the audience as well as the news organisation should be able to make judgements so we can come up with conclusions of the story they say. Alain de Botton quoted "neutrality is impossible" news is unbalanced. News channels only just explain what has happened in today world but don't really go in deeper, explaining their views and concluding what should happen next but instead they just feed us the news and move on, which in my view is a problem. Furthermore, Alain de Botton said that there is a lot of excess in news, theres too much news which makes it harder to know the priorities of what news we, as the audience should take in, through all this excess news, we have become less political. News distracts as all from the important problems that are happening in society, at times news much focuses on softer news or news that is not as important as others - Alain de botton said a really good quote that i think it is very relevant and makes me question our society; "how do you get the most important news the popular news" us audience are to blame in this case, its because we prefer the softer news or non-political news because it would grab our attention more than the other, we'd like to see more of the negative news (Galtung & Ruge's.) This all makes me realise that audience are not empowered but news are in control more than anything. 

2) How can you link Marxism and Hegemony to de Botton's criticisms of the News?
I think that somethings that Alain de Botton says do sometimes link with what he says about news but it is majority of the time linked with Marxism and Hegemony. For example, Alain de Botton says that news do focus on one comical class over others and the media/news would portray them as the higher class would see the other classes or their own - they are controlling what we know and need to know, this reinforces the status quo since we are only retaining the information/stories that news are showing without questioning or challenging it. Marxism is strongly linked with how Alain de Botton criticises the news, news will do everything they can in order to keep their jobs but also gain profit, they will show what the audience want to see; negative news, which may not even be important news hence why Alain de Botton said "news corrupts us"

3) How could you use Pluralism and new technology to challenge de Botton's views on the News?
We can use pluralism and new technology to challenge de Botton's view on the news is through UGC which is then lead to citizen journalism. Pluralists believe that audiences are perceived as capable of manipulating the media and having access to 'plural views of society' enabling them to 'conform, accommodate or reject' - they believe that audience are able to challenge the news, and UGC and citizen journalism can challenge de Botton's views on how the audience react to news. This would reinforce that audiences are no longer passive but now active and get to control what they take in from the news/media.

4) Choose two news stories from the last six months - one that supports de Botton's views and one that challenges his belief that the News is used for social control.

Suppports de Botton views - I'm A Celeb bosses accused of 'fixing' show by giving Scarlett Moffatt extra airtime

Challenges de Botton views - Andrew Lansley chides chancellor lack of NHS and social care funding

Weekly New Digital Media - 23.11.16 (22)

Barack Obama on fake news: 'We have problems' if we can't tell the difference

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/17/barack-obama-fake-news-facebook-social-media

Summary; President Barack Obama has spoken out about fake news on Facebook and other media platforms, suggesting that it helped undermine the US political process.Since the surprise election of Donald Trump as president-elect, Facebook has battled accusations that it has failed to stem the flow of misinformation on its network and that its business model leads to users becoming divided. Obama said we live in a age with "so much active misinformation" that is "packaged very well." Fake news on the social network swayed voters in the US presidential election. That’s in spite of analysis by BuzzFeed that showed that fake news on the site outperformed real news in the run-up to polling day. Google and Facebook announced plans to go after the revenue of fake news sites, kicking the hoaxers off their ad networks in an attempt to prevent misleading the public from being profitable. Although this reduces the financial incentive to generate fake news websites, it doesn’t tackle the distribution of such content on Facebook.

[] At a Democratic party rally on 7 November, Obman denounced the “crazy conspiracy theorizing” that spreads on Facebook, creating a “dust cloud of nonsense”.

[] If you were to believe the top Google result for “final election results” on Monday, you’d think that Trump won the popular vote in the 2016 election. He did not.

[] Google’s algorithms are also susceptible to fake news, the company wants to be seen as better at tackling it than Facebook.

My Opinion: The fact that Obama is speaking this issue shows that fake news is a major problem and have effected a lot of the outer issues such as the US elections. I agree with Obama when he said that it is becoming a problem when we don't know if information online is fake or not. This on going battle is becoming a problem with both the institutions and the audiences, because it is a problem for audience to trust the institutions and its a problem for the institutions because they need to be able to contain their audience and keep their social networking popular among the audiences/ 

Weekly New and Digital Media - 23.11.16 (21)

Still in vogue: luxury magazines defy print market gloom 

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/20/still-in-vogue-luxury-magazines-defy-print-market-gloom

Summary: In this article, it explains that Vogue and design and lifestyle bible Wallpaper - the luxury magazines appear to be defying the advertiser and reader exodus rapidly eroding the rest of the magazine market despite the 100 years of Vogue. This is in contrast to the fortunes of the luxury magazine market, which appears resilient to the wider change in consumer reading habits in the digital age. 

International president of Vogue; Nicholas Coleridge said that content on a table or Ipad cannot match the experience of that "magazine moment." "It is very hard to replicate the physical allure of a luxury magazine on other platforms.""Many people say that press advertising is dead or dying, but glossy magazines are holding their own,” said Jo Blake, head of publishing at Havas Media Group.

[] More than a million British consumers stopped buying print magazines, or gave up their subscription, in the year to the end of June. 

[] NME has been forced to go free to find an audience as paying print fans dry up.

[] Titles such as Loaded, Zoo, Nuts, FHM, Company, InStyle and Reveal have closed or embarked on digital-only reimaginings.

[] WPP’s Group M media arm has forecast print ad spend on consumer magazines in total will fall 14% this year, to £320m, the luxury market is breaking records.

[]Vogue’s centenary issue in June, which featured the Duchess of Cambridge on the cover, was at 464 pages its biggest ever – and contained a record number of pages of advertising - 264

[]Time UK’s Wallpaper – in its 20th year – put out a record 508-page edition in September with a bumper 230 pages of advertising. 

[] Cara Delevingne’s appearance on September’s Vogue helped drive sales to 230,000, pointed out that a number of its luxury titles are doing better than in the pre-internet days.

[]Vogue sold 135,000 copies in 1989 but now sells about 200,000 on average

[]GQ is up from 40,000 to over 100,000

My Opinion: Even though print is dying, there is something about magazines especially fashion magazines that do attract an audience to buy a physical copy. This can be due to the celebrities on the cover or an issue that is discussed in the magazine. As Nicholas Coleridge said “It is very hard to replicate the physical allure of a luxury magazine on other platforms - this could be due to the fact with the sheen of the paper, the way that the ink sits on the page, the smell of money and desire that wafts off the page. Readers move into a different mode when they engage with a glossy. Advertisers understand this." This could be a persuasion for the audience to buy the magazines.