The 'Reynolds' Ten Point Test.

The Reynolds defence, is a ten point guideline set out by judge Lord Nichols during a court case in which Albert Reynolds, former Prime Minister of Ireland, accused the Times newspaper of libel.

Lord Nichols stated that courts should apply the following ten point test, to see if a press story passes the 'right to know test'.

This is now used as a vital tool for journalists to avoid legal action being taken against them.

1. The seriousness of the allegation
2. The nature of the subject matter, and whether or not it is in the public interest
3. The source of the information
4. The status of the information
5. The steps taken to verify this information
6. The urgency of the matter
7. Whether a comment was sought from the person being defamed
8. Whether or not the article gives an idea of the person being defamed's side of the story
9. The tone of the article
10. The circumstances and the timing of the publication.

Adam Smith and Jonathan Swift

In what had to be my favourite seminar of the year, we discussed the economics of Adam Smith, but more importantly: CANNIBALISM, in the form of Dr Jonathan Swift's ' A Modest Proposal for preventing the children of poor people in Ireland, from being a burden on their parents or country, and for making them beneficial to the publick.' I will split this Blog into two sections: Economics and CANNIBALISM.

Economics

At the time that Adam Smith was writing (1776), the term economics was not really in use. He would have been seen as more of a social philosopher. Many may see him as the founder of economics as we know it today. He believed in a 'Laizze Faire' economy. Laizze faire is French for 'let do' and it refers to a lack of government interference in trade, allowing a free market, and only taxing fairly and when strictly necessary. The term capitalism was not in use at this time, although what Smith was referring to was a sense of capitalism it was referred to as a 'system of perfect liberty'.

Before Smith came along, people generally believed in a system of mercantilism, the idea that it is Gods will that one country may be richer than another. this was a medieval way of thinking and Smith wanted to modernise this. His writing was clear and concise, much like that of his friend John Locke and other enlightenment writers. His essays were not necessarily aimed specialists in the way that I find modern economics is. He mentions that the idea of self interest is not a bad thing. With people working to look after their own finances and their own land, they would surely be better off, this would also benefit society as a whole. We discussed the idea that with free, successful worldwide trade, war would almost certainly be averted.

Smith mentions the importance of the relationship between the state and the 'town'. He sees that means of production should be set up in towns, the towns then produce things, which both the town and the state can profit from. He's promoting the idea of a production line, which in turn, introduces luxuries into towns, benefiting the economy further.

A key part of his economics is the idea of the 'hidden hand of the market'. This is a metaphysical idea suggesting that the market has the ability to change and correct itself and sort people into the fields of work that they are good at. He notes that maximum hours, for the minimum wage will not benefit anybody, and would surely see that slavery is on the whole inefficient.

CANNIBALISM!

A Modest Proposal

Jonathan Swift was an Irish, politically active writer, writing before Adam Smith. 'A Modest Proposal' was published in 1729, at a time of famine and depression in Ireland. His basic ideas are as follows:

• There are too many people in Ireland
• There is not enough food in Ireland for all of these people, many people have taken to begging on the streets
• Due to the large catholic population in Ireland, there are lots of children.
• Parents who are unable to support their children should therefore, raise their children for one year, and them sell them as livestock, to wealthy landowners, who can use the meat for a high class banquet, or several family meals.

Swift stated that the advantages that this would bring to Ireland would include:

• A reduction in the population
• An improvement to the economy, as poor people would be providing 'goods' and being paid well for them.
• It would 'greatly lessen the number of papists', who he believes are 'the principal breeders of the nation as well as our greatest enemies'
• 'A new dish introduced to the tables of all gentlemen of fortune in the kingdom'
• This new food would bring extra custom to 'Taverns'
• An reduction in the amount of domestic abuse, due to Husbands becoming 'as fond of their wives during pregnancy, as they are now of their mares in foal, their cows in calf, or their sow when they are ready to farrow.'

Why didn't I think of this fantastic idea?

Unfortunately for the fortunes of Ireland, Swift was not being entirely serious. He was using irony to ridicule the governments poor handling of the problems that Ireland was facing, as well as writers (much like Adam Smith) who used hard economic, empirical reasoning to try and solve social problems. He is also making a mockery of the obvious exploitation that the poor were facing at the hands of the wealthy, and commenting on the complete mess that Ireland was in.

After reading the piece, It is clear that even the title is sarcastic, 'A Modest Proposal'. Introducing the idea of cannibalism seems extreme, but it is as though he is commenting that only in Ireland, could society actually be improved with cannibalism. He also uses it as an incentive for people to stop domestic violence, although it was far more common in the 1700s than it is today, for a man to love his livestock more than he does his wife gives us a pretty bleak picture of what Ireland was like at the time. He states at one point that he believes people would be better dead than in their current position, I don't think there is anything ironic about what he is saying here, he is just explaining the extremity of the situation.

Swift seems to be opposing utilitarianism, the idea that we should behave in a way that promotes the greatest happiness for the greatest number, this is something that Adam Smith would promote. Although Smith wrote after Swift it seems as though it is this sort of empirical writing that Swift is attacking. There had been many pamphlets similar to Swifts, attempting to solve Irelands problems, using logical, empirical, scientific ideas. Swift would argue that that these logical ideas have no place in relation to human concern, and he shows this perfectly with his absurd proposal.

David Hume.

David Hume (1711-1776) was a Scottish empiricist, he is regarded alongside John Locke as a key philosopher in empirical thinking. I have been looking into his most noteable essay, 'An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding' where he outlines his empirical philosophical ideas with regards to human thinking and where our ideas come from.

He begins by seperating ideas and impression. He believes that impressions come first, these are supposedly strong and vivid and come directly from sense experience, and these consist of things such as pain, love happiness and sadness. Ideas, he says follow on from and are made up from our impressions, complex ideas are made up from bundles of simple ideas. For example, as far as I am aware, i have never seen a gold mountain; however I have seen gold, and I have seen a mountain. I can put these two simple impressions together to create the complex idea of a gold mountain. This is easily criticised as the terms he uses seem somewhat vague and sketchy.

He later discusses his ideas about causation, which I find fascinating, but hard to realistically apply to real life. He states that necessity exists in the mind, not in objects, meaning that in reality nothing is necessary. A famous example is of the sun rising: just because it rose today, and yesterday, and every day in my experience, that is not to say it will tomorrow. When the white ball hits the red ball in a game of billiards, the red ball moves, Hume would say that this was not necessarily caused by the white ball. To live thinking like this would surely drive anyone insane, but this understandably relates to journalism. Everything must be done to ensure that what you are saying is truthful. Just because your trustworthy friend, or Wikipedia, or both claim something to be true, this does not make it true, we still need to find out with empirical certainty that something is true.

An idea that made me sympathise with Hume was his assertion that concepts such as heat and pain are only formed in word, or in our minds. To an extent this seems to make sense, as it is heard of for people to undergo hypnotism instead of anaesthetic before painful operations. This is similar to the way that people don't notice that they have suffered an injury, until they see physical damage, and then begin to feel the pain.

'Hume’s fork' is used, in a similar way to Ayers verification principle, to seperate relevant ideas from nonsense. One side of the fork contains relations of ideas, for example, a bachelor is an unmarried man. These can be proved with certainty. These are analytic, necessary knowable and apriori but tell us nothing new about the world. They are tautologies. On the other side of the fork sit 'matters of fact'. These are things that can be proved using our senses, for example, the bus is red, or it is raining outside. These are synthetic, contingent, aposteriori. Immanuel Kant would argue that synthetic apriori knowledge would give us true knowledge of the world, he believes the closest we have to this is intuition. The problem with Hume’s fork, much like the verification principle, is that it is neither a relation of ideas or a matter of fact, so it fails its own test.

I like to think that the basic idea that Hume is trying to assert, is that we should be slightly sceptical, and that there is no such thing as a rational belief. I think that he wanted us to see that certainty and maths are good, and gossip, small talk and assumptions are bad. I like to think that David Hume didn't walk around constantly amazed that he still existed, and that he didn't judge the man who thinks that he is a poached egg in the same way as people who think that they are human. He either exaggerates his point to make it clear and understandable, or he genuinely did lead a very strange and confusing lifestyle.

Codes of Conduct

The National Union of Journalists has a code of conduct that all of its members are expected to abide by. Most organisations will expect their journalists to be part of this union although it is no longer compulsory, due to a change in trade union laws. If a Journalist breaks the N.U.J code of conduct they can be removed from the union, and in most cases, sacked from their place of employment.

Here is the code in full:

Members of the National Union of Journalists are expected to abide by the following professional principles:

1. At all times upholds and defends the principle of media freedom, the right of freedom of expression and the right of the public to be informed

2.Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair

3. Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies

4.Differentiates between fact and opinion

5. Obtains material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means

6.Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest

7. Protects the identity of sources who supply information in confidence
and material gathered in the course of her/his work

8.Resists, threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information

9. Takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of her/his duties before the information is public knowledge

10. Produces no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of a person’s age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.

11.Does not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save for the promotion of her/his own work or of the medium by which she/he is employed

12. Avoids plagiarism.

Employees of Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation group are not contractually allowed to be a part of the N.U.J. Instead; The Times, The Sunday Times, The Sun and The News of the World journalists are governed by the Press Complaints Commission.

I.T.V and Sky follow guidelines set by OFCOM, the communications regulator. OFCOM deal with taste and decency on the TV, they have been in the news a lot over the past two years, thanks to competition scandals, and 'Sachsgate.' I found this link on their official website particularly amusing:

Harrassed by Journalists?

The BBC supports the N.U.J code of conduct but also have their own set of editorial guidelines, which can be found here.

BBC Radio 5 Live

BBC Radio 5 Live was launched by the BBC in 1994 in an attempt to remarket BBC Radio 5, which was launched in 1990, but received few listeners. It is known to specialise in radio phone-ins, sports and in depth news analysis. It is the UK’s principle radio station for sporting events.

The news comes across as reasonably unbiased, and although no statistics were available regarding the age of listeners, it seems to me as though it would attract an older audience than Radio 1, but a younger audience than Radio 4. When discussing the student protests, for example, Radio 5 did mention violence and arrests on several occasions, whereas a report from Radio 1 focused on the reasons behind the protest and even had a reporter protesting with the students. There was barely a mention of violence and the word ‘riot’ was not used. During ‘606’; a football based phone in shows, aimed at people travelling home from football grounds after watching their team, the language seems very colloquial throughout. The presenter seems at one with his callers as ‘laddish’ banter is shared between them. Hosts such as Richard Bacon, and recent guests including Tim Minchin and Alesha Dixon also point to a reasonably young audience, potentially listening whilst driving to and from college or work, or listening online whilst doing other things. It is uncommon today, for a young person to be solely listening to a radio, when a television is likely to be available as an alternative.

Although there was no data available regarding gender or social class, the fact that ‘5 Live Football’ is the most downloaded podcast on BBC Radio 5 and the seventh most popular podcast n ‘BBC iPlayer’ we can assume that this is an audience largely dominated by men. We cannot say much about social class from this statistic but it seems as though it would attract more ABC1s than Radio 1 and fewer ABC1s than Radio 4. It could be argued that some of the programmes on Radio 5 could easily fit in on Radio 4, for example ‘wake up to money.’ This does however show Radio 5 to be the primary radio station for current affairs, Radio 4 seems more concerned with Arts and high brow comedy.

The news agenda on Radio 5 differs quite substantially from that of The Times. They tend to contain the same or similar stories, but in a different order, this is because a Radio can be constantly updating its news agenda, as news changes and develops throughout the day. For example on the 24th of November 2010 The Times ran a picture of North Korea bombing a South Korean island. This story was not even included on Radio 5’s midday news, as it had actually taken place the day before. Radio 5 instead led with news that a paedophile gang had been convicted; this news had come through just shortly before the news bulletin was aired.

The Times

‘The Times’ was first published in 1785. It is a ‘quality’ newspaper and until 2003 was a broadsheet. It has since moved to tabloid size, much like all other quality newspapers, excluding The Daily Telegraph. Since 1981 The Times has been owned by News International, the European subsidiary of News Corporation; this is largely owned by Rupert Murdoch. The paper is currently edited by James Harding.

Politically, The Times is known to be a centre right standing paper, supporting the Conservative Party; however during the 2001 and 2005 elections it switched allegiance to Tony Blair’s Labour Party. It switched back to its Conservative allegiance before the 2010 election, choosing to support David Cameron. Despite this, in 2005 MORI (The UK’s second largest polling organisation) said that the voting intentions of The Times readership was 40% for the Conservative Party, 29% for the Liberal Democrats and 26% for Labour. This helps us to understand the papers shifts in allegiance.

The Times currently sells around 500,000 copies every day. They claim to be the number one daily newspaper for business, with more readers than the Financial Times and the Daily Telegraph combined. They claim to have 1.6 million readers daily and believe that 88 per cent of these readers belong to social classes ABC1. Its readers are believed to have an average yearly income of £42,000.

One thing that sets the times apart from other newspapers is its online content. Whereas most newspaper websites are free to view, The Times is a subscription service. Customers have to pay £1, for one days access, or £2 per week. It could be argued that Rupert Murdoch and the News Corporation Group have solved the problem of constant decline of newspaper sales. Their readers are devoted to the paper and are likely to stick with The Times, even though it may cost them. The Sun however remains free. This is likely to reflect the papers respective demographics, a sun reader, likely to be in the C2D bracket, is more likely to be a manual worker, or a labourer. This means that they are less likely to have time throughout the day to read a newspaper online in detail. A times reader is more likely to be an office worker, or in self employment. This means that they will spend a larger portion of their time in front of a computer; it may therefore make sense financially for them to subscribe to the website, rather than buy the newspaper daily.

The Times is also famous for its obituaries and each year prints more than 900. The majority are written by specialists but many people contribute to their contents. Between 5,000 and 6,000 written obituaries on the famous, and occasionally the notorious, are kept on file. The letters page is also famous in its own right, each letter beginning with ‘Dear Sir.’ Around 1,500 letters are believed to be received every week. The letters printed tend to be punchy, witty and of course relevant to the day’s news. This in many ways reflects the writing styles of most of the columnists in The Times; these include Daniel Finkelstein, Alice Thomson, Ken Macdonald, Tina Brown and my personal favourite: Caitlin Moran.

Water + Laptop = Bad

Apologies for the lack of blogs lately, apparently laptops aren't too keen on water. Somehow it is working again, so I will be trying to catch up in the coming weeks.

Newspapers.

Mid-Market News

The mid-market newspapers consist of The Daily Mail and The Express. If you are a grandparent then you read The Mail, this is based on the evidence of every grandparent that I have ever met and is therefore one hundred per cent accurate. This may help to explain the fact that it has the second biggest weekday and Sunday readership in the UK (after the sun, meaning that there are officially more white van drivers in Britain than there are grandparents). Peter Cole sums up the Mails basic views nicely, 'for Britain and against Europe' (some may also say against America, Asia, Africa, The North etc...) It could definitely be seen as a newspaper of the right wing variety. The Mail stands for tough punishments, tough immigration laws, traditional family values. It rejects the welfare state. Cole also mentions that the Mail knows its audience and is confident of its audience, and that is why it continues to please its audience (oh and the constant supply of free Beach Boys CDs.)

The Mail's only real competitor is the Daily Express, which at its peak in the 1950s sold an incredible 4 million copies every day. In 2007 this number had dropped to 770,000. Cole believes this to related to it's changes in allegiance around the time of its popularity. The Express has an odd obsession for Princess Diana conspiracy theories (much like myself). Cole states that this is due to connections that Hugh Wittow (deputy editor) has in Paris. He comments on how this obsession has recently transformed to Madeleine McCann. It seems as though for now however the Mail has the Mid-Market Market (?) wrapped around its papery little finger and the Express will remain in second place.

The Tabloids

I was surprised when reading this to find out that the sales of tabloids are massively decreasing, at first I was considering that this may be due to an increase in general intelligence, causing people to turn to broadsheets, however it is far more likely that reading is completely unnecessary to many people thanks to television. Tabloids tend to follow everyday topics of meaningless conversation, for example what celebrities are wearing/having sex with, as much as, if not more than 'proper news.' Piers Morgan tried to change this in The Mirror after 9/11, he says:

"The Mirror's a sensational paper, but sensationalism doesn't mean the distortion of the truth. It means the vivid and dramatic presentation of events so as to give them a forceful impact on the mind of the reader."

This worked to an extent, until an 'investigation' was taken a little bit too far and photos depicting British troops torturing Iraqi soldiers were found to be faked. Piers Morgan was sacked.

The Sun is Britain's top selling newspaper and this is no coincidence. Peter Cole emphasises that tabloid journalists are by no means bad journalists. In fact in many cases they are some of the best. They write emotive stories, that are easy to read and entertaining. In a world where people don't often have a lot of time, The Sun is an easy read. Cole sums it up very well

"Some of the best journalists work for tabloids and the techniques of tabloid journalism are the hardest to acquire. The ideas that go into tabloids, the presentational devices employed, the economy of language, the directness of views and the irreverence of the Sun at its best are as impressive as ever. It is the editorial agenda that has gone awry. The political reporting, when it is there, of both Sun and Mirror remains sharp"

The Broadsheets

The Broadsheets consist of the Guardian, The Times, The Independent and The Telegraph. Peter Cole mentions that the readership of all four papers combined is smaller than that of the Daily Mail. This can no longer be blamed on the fact that they are so big and annoying to read in the wind as they are nearly all available in a compact form (except the telegraph). These papers tend to deal with 'serious news', They are generally not interested in celebrities, unless one of them dies or something else 'serious' happens.

The Independent is slightly different to these other papers, described by its editor as a 'viewspaper' it tends not to worry about what's going on in the world and 'concentrates on the issues it believes it's readers care about.' Cole writes:

" It is the lightest fighter in the ring, but it has carved a niche, capturing a constituency dependent on a daily fix of war, climate change, Heathrow protests, Darfur and university clearing."

The Guardian is the most read of the Broadsheets, Cole says that the times 'agonises over the human condition and cannot quite understand why the world isn't a better place.' It also has a reasonably new magazine section called 'G2' which is aimed at a younger audience, giving it an extra dimension in a world of newspapers often ignored by a younger audience.

From my own experience, I find that the sports coverage in broadsheets is superb. However in day to day news I find myself missing the sensationalism and ridiculous puns that often barely make sense that only a tabloid can offer.

Mid-Market newspapers

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/aug/20/mondaymediasection.pressandpublishing

Tabloids newspapers

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/aug/27/mondaymediasection.pressandpublishing

Broadheets newspapers

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/sep/03/mondaymediasection.pressandpublishing1

Copyright. McNae's Chapter 28.

Copyright: The act of making beneficial use of somebody elses intellectual work.

For a journalist, it is vital to avoid falling victim to copyright laws. These laws are rapidly changing although they have existed for around 200 years.

'Intellectual work' comprises of music, film, typographical arrangements (the exact words from somebody elses piece of writing), sound recordings, photographs, artistic or dramatic works as well as many more. Mcnae quotes a judge as once saying 'anything worth copying is worth protecting' and I think that this sums up the necessity for copyright laws quite nicely.

During the lecture Chris used an analogy about a garden shed. If you are building a shed, then the shed belongs to you, however when you sell this shed you lose all rights to the shed. Even if the shed is then sold on for a thousand times its original price, you are not entitled to anything.

This can be linked to a freelance journalist, who has just written an investigative article. If he then sells this to a leading newspaper, who put it on their front page and make millions from it, he has sold the copyright and is therefore not entitled to anything. If however this journalist published the article on his blog, and a leading newspaper copied it, this would be illegal, and the freelance journalist would be able to sue; and probably win.

A journalist working for a company will nearly always have signed a contract stating that they surrender any rights to commercial exploitation of their work. This means that after writing and submitting a story, it is owned by the company. These journalists are paid in wages rather than commission from their stories.

Seminar Paper: Addison and The Spectator

Addison and the Spectator - what the essays reveal about civil society and the reading public in the restoration age

· Born in 1672

· Was writing around 70 years before Dr Johnson

· Was a keen traveller, travelling around Europe. Significant due to renaissance

· Was asked to produce poetry, that apparently pleased the lord treasurer so much that he was appointed commissioner in Halifax’s Government


· Secretary to Lord Lieutenant of Ireland 1709 – 1713


· This is where he met Jonathan Swift (poet, essay writer), both influenced each other’s writings. Also believed to be heavily influenced by the adoration that Daniel Defoe recieved.

· Also met Steele a childhood friend, who was producing Tatler, began contributing. The two of them then produced the Spectator. First edition released in 1711.

· At first, the spectator appeared daily, running until 1714 with a break of around a year and a half.

· Also wrote works of fiction. Cato, written in 1712 is regarded as his most famous

· The spectator was very popular,it had a great deal of influence on the public.

· Assisted with Steele’s setting up of the Guardian 1713

· Died in 1719

Joseph Addison’s publications are largely based on public observation. It seems to show off Addison’s love for social commentary, this can be seen in his essay ‘The Royal Exchange’ where he discusses his satisfaction of watching the gathering and mixing of nationalities and cultures at The Royal exchange in London. There were huge social changes taking place in England thanks to the rise in immigration and the rise in foreign trade, The Royal Exchange was the head of International trade. He constantly writes with a sense of joy and excitement when discussing the diversity that he witnesses around there. This was also an exciting time in England thanks to the end of Cromwell’s puritanism and and an enhancement of the trade and finance available across the world.

Addison is very relevant in terms of Journalism; he speaks of the importance of writing precisely and with method. He claims that ‘men of great knowledge or genius ‘ ‘are often too full to be exact and therefore choose to throw down their pearls in heaps before the reader, rather than be at the pains of stringing them.’ It is likely that this represents the views of the reading public throughout the restoration age. Although readers of Addison would have been well educated and wealthy men, there is still a huge importance on being able to group ideas clearly and concisely. They should not be ‘thrown together without order and connection’. Addison says that man, when reading a well organised precise piece of writing ‘comprehends everything easily, takes it in with pleasure and retains it long’

In Short, number 476 of the spectator makes me think that the reading public during the restoration age were greatly concerned with accuracy, although it was being written nearly 70 years before Dr Johnsons dictionary was produced, the spelling and punctuation in his publication seem quite standard throughout.

Addison was writing around the time of the restoration age, when England was beginning to restore itself and calm down after many years of unrest under Oliver Cromwell. Free speech was returning after a long period of puritanism; this helped Addison’s cause massively during this exciting period. He already had quite a following before the magazine had even been published; it is believed that he would attract large crowds of friends, acquaintances and often complete strangers when simply discussing the world in public. I imagine these meetings to be similar to the way that Plato’s dialogues take place.

Joseph Addison could also be seen as the first man who could be regarded as a journalist in the way that we do today, he was one of the first people to begin writing to entertain people, not to enhance a political party or organisation. He was also writing to make money, despite the fact that the printing press was not fully capable of mass production. It seems as though with The Spectator, Addison and Steele felt like the public were once again ready for philosophy to be part of everyday life, as it was during the renaissance. It may have seemed like some form of secret society to many people, only taught to the elite of society. They wanted to bring philosophical discussion back into people’s lives. The reading public were finally looking to read something entertaining, for leisure, not just propaganda from the ruling classes, religion or political parties. This is how modern journalism has evolved.

Journalism in the Nineteenth Century.

Nineteenth Century Journalism

The nineteenth century saw Journalism begin to evolve into the industry that it is today. After ‘The Daily Courant’ was introduced in 1702, daily newspapers quickly became popular and therefore profitable. By the seventeenth century there were around 234 newspapers being published in America. The nineteenth century also saw a rise in investigative journalism.

The concept of ‘yellow press’ or ‘yellow journalism’ came about in nineteenth century America. This is the name that was given to the catchy headlines and the sensationalism that was used to sell papers. Techniques used today by British tabloid newspapers resemble yellow journalism, however, due to libel laws; stories tend to have a lot more truth to them today. This form of journalism peaked in 1861 due to the American Civil War where the demand for news increased. This meant more competition between newspapers. Around this time newspapers were beginning to be managed like businesses, looking to make money, rather than simply support political parties as they previously had done.

In Britain, journalism seemed to be developing quite differently. It is described by Denys Thompson in his text: ‘A Hundred Years of The Higher Journalism’ as providing ‘many intelligent people with a livelihood and an opportunity of using their talent without feeling that it was wasted.’ He also suggests that ‘Journalism gave expression to the greatest minds of the time’. It could be argued that the high quality of British Journalism in the nineteenth century is not surprising, as uneducated people would have been unable to read. Newspapers and magazines were being produced by wealthy, intelligent people, for other wealthy, intelligent people. Journalism in nineteenth century Britain (particularly London) can be characterised by consistently high standards, and an appreciation for politics and the arts.

One of the key factors of change to journalism in the nineteenth century was the development of photography. By 1840, Cameras were being used both commercially and as a hobby, although there was still no way of mass producing photographs. If a publication wanted to use a photo, they had to use a woodcut. By around 1890, photographs were able to be used with the printing press, thanks to the development of the ‘half-toning process’. These developments completely changed the way that journalists worked; they were now able to add in an element of evidence to their publications. This also expanded the target market of the journalist, causing people to buy newspapers and magazines even if they were unable to read.

It seems as though during the nineteenth century, journalism began its ascendance to prominence in both America and Britain. The American Civil War and the abolition of slavery made America pay attention to news in an entirely new way, whereas ‘higher journalism’ in Britain gave a platform to many 1people with opinions on politics, art and philosophy. The Industrial Revolution also helped with the mass production of newspapers and magazines throughout the world, and the rise in immigration led to these publications being recreated in different languages.

http://www.thefossils.org/horvat/higher/higher.htm
http://www.ablongman.com/stovall1e/chap21/chap21.html
Louis James: Print and the People 1819-1851
Aspinall: Politics and the press 1780-1830

Sam Ashton

John Locke: An Essay Concering Human Understanding part one: Of Ideas in General and Their Origin.

This chapter of Locke's essay primarily outlines his key ideas on empiricism. Empiricism is the idea that we are born as a blank slate, a 'Tabula Rasa'. He entirely rejects the idea of innate ideas and insists that all of our ideas come from experience. He suggests that knowledge is not 'a priori', (before experience) but rather 'a posteriori' (after experience).
On the whole I found this piece of text reasonably easy to read and surprisingly accessible to a modern audience. Admittedly, this did have something to do with the nicely set out, separated and numbered points. Locke manages to outline his ideas clearly and concisely which is a skill I wish more philosophers would invest in.

Locke begins his essay by asserting that all 'conscious' men have ideas, having an idea basically meaning to think. He then goes on to say that it is possible for men to have more than one idea at once and mentions abstract ideas such as 'whiteness, drunkenness' and 'elephant'. These would be classified as abstract ideas because there tends not to be one individual thing that we can think of when we think about these things; they are concepts as a whole.

One thing that I found when reading this is that Locke seems to repeat his key point, that ideas come from experience, several times in slightly different ways, probably as to emphasise his point more clearly, which to his credit he certainly manages.

For example:
• 'All ideas come from sensation or reflection'
• 'The soul begins to have ideas when it begins to perceive'
• 'A man begins to have ideas when he first has sensations'
• 'No ideas but from sensation and reflection, evident, if we observe children'
• 'a foetus in the mother’s womb differs not much from the state of a vegetable'
• (A foetus shows) 'few signs of a soul accustomed to much thinking'
• 'I see no reason, therefore, to believe that the soul thinks before the senses have furnished it with ideas to think on'

He also mentions without experience, we would always stay as 'Tabula Rasa'. This is hard to even conceptualise, but it is even harder to imagine never having any sensations. He suggests that ideas at first may be vague, until they are explored in more depth through conversation. This seems like a typical thing for any philosopher to assert, however it does seem to make sense, as the power to communicate is what sets Humans apart from other mammals, and could also be the key to our superior understanding of the world.

Locke talks in depth about dreaming, and this is the area that I found a little less straightforward. He suggests that the soul, which he seems to use interchangeably with the mind, does not think when we sleep, and even when we do think we cannot always perceive this thought. He uses the idea of dreaming to back this up by suggesting that the sleeping man thinks without knowing, he then goes on to say that the sleeping man and the awake man are separate people. He does manage to keep his arguments empirical by saying that if we cannot remember a dream, then there is no proof at all that there was a dream at all.

I personally like the way that Locke was free in his writing and was able to write what he thought without having to worry about official opinions. It is reported that the government supported his ideas. Although he is believed to be religious, he comes across as being a deist, so he tends not to involve God in his philosophy. It comes as little surprise to me that Locke is still so respected in the world of empiricist philosophy.

Mcnae's essential law for Journalists. Defamation

What is Defamation?
Defamation is one of the most common causes for action to be taken against a journalist therefore it is important for me to be aware of it and well informed about it. When something is printed about somebody that may damage their reputation in the mind of right thinking members of society, this is defamation. It must be seen to lower peoples estimations of the person in question, it must be published to a third party and the person must be clearly identified. Defamation can lead to people being shunned from society or avoided, it can discredit people in their trade or profession and it can expose people to ridicule and even hatred.

So how are any negative newspaper stories ever published?
Defamation is not always illegal. In many circumstances, defamation is in the public interest and needs to be reported. For example if a newspaper was to report that a public figure was sent to prison for murder, it would be damaging his reputation, however if it was true and can be proved, this is called justification. A journalist can still be sued if the story is true, this is why it is important to always have absolute empirical evidence for anything written. Privilege is another defence for journalists, if the news is in the interest of the public, this is slightly more risky however as it is often hard to tell what is and what isn't in the public interest. If a Journalist is reporting from court and he is seen to defame somebody (factually) then he has what is known as absolute privilege, complete protection from legal action.

In a newspaper, the whole article needs to be taken into consideration. For example if a headline says something that could be considered defamatory, but the article underneath explains that in actual fact it is not, that would be acceptable. This is known as Bane and antidote. It is important that the antidote is sufficient in explaining the bane.

If a Journalist was to defame somebody without justification, it is possible that they could correct it to appease the victim. They can include a correction in the newspaper stating that what they said was incorrect and often apologising. (This will be small, near the back of the newspaper and will rarely get seen.)

Purposefully saying something in order to damage a reputation or something that you know to be untrue is known as malice. This is illegal and should be avoided at all costs in journalism.

What makes a good journalist?

I believe that a good journalist will always write truthfully, obeying all laws and avoiding defamation where possible. They will always report on things that are in the interest of the public in an engaging way. It is important that a journalist has a lot of contacts; this will increase their ability to produce interesting and informative news reports on a broad range of topics. Interviewing technique is also important, journalists must have an attitude that will encourage people to be open with them and give them information without fear of it being taken out of context. Journalists should have a broad knowledge of what they are writing about as well as an interest and a passion for the topic, this will come across in the writing and therefore be far more interesting for the reader. Like most professions, Journalistic technique improves with experience.

Winchester News Online

Winchester news online looks extremely professional and the main anchor does an extremely good job, as does the sports reader. Both have extremely good voices and sound as though they are well practiced and experienced in news reading. I feel as though to focus on only one of them with the camera when it becomes clear that they have both been sitting together for the entire broadcast seems a little strange, it may as well show both presenters throughout or just stick with one presenter. The stories seem relevant, particularly regarding student finance, and it is clear that these have been well thought out. It disappointed me slightly that the video of the Queen was a recording of a screen; however it is understandable that it may not have been possible to show the footage any other way. The sports highlights were particularly good, due to the good quality of the footage that had been recorded live, the commentary was clear but could have been more enthusiastic.

To improve the look of the programme as a whole, I think it would be a good idea to have a consistent background theme when showing text, for example statements from people and sports results. When names are displayed at the bottom of the screen when somebody is speaking, they should sometimes be displayed for slightly longer, as sometimes it is hard to read the name of the speaker, whilst staying concentrated on what they were saying.

Bertrand Russell, A History of Western Philosophy.

I have been reading Bertrand Russell's 'History of Western Philosophy' and in this blog I will be focusing on Descartes, Machiavelli and Thomas More; three of the characters he discusses in his book, it will also be neccessary to involve Plato due to the similarities his ideas have with their modern counterparts.

The ideas outlined in Machiavelli's 'The Prince' (15143) seem as relevant today as they did when they were written. He suggests that the best way of gaining power is cruelty and deception. He believes that a leader should be feared as opposed to liked. Machiavelli was possibly the first person to argue that morality has nothing to do with leadership, he also dismissed the idea of rulers having a divine right to rule, passed to them from God. These ideas contradict Plato's ideas in 'The Republic'. Plato believes that a ruler should be a Philosopher, who doesn't want to rule, but feels morally obliged to due to his belief that he is the best option. Although in our society, modern rulers tend not to be brutal tyrants, it often seems as though politicians would do anything at all for power.

Renee Descartes's was a rationalist philosopher who came up with 'Cogito Ergo Sum', meaning 'I think therefore I am'. He challenged every piece of knowledge he thought he had and only accepted facts that he thought could be rationally verified. He eventually decided that his existence could only be proved due to the fact that he thinks. Descartes then went on to 'prove' the existence of God, unforunately this was done poorly, particularly by Descartes standards. It is hard to tell however whether or not he did believe in God or if he was doing so as not to ruin his reputation in such a religious society.

Thomas More, much like Plato wrote about an ideal state for man to live in, Called Utopia. According to More everything in Utopia is perfect, it is basically a communist state. There is no private ownership of property, all houses are alike and fashions never change. People work for six hours per day and have eight hours of sleep, they can play for one hour. Everybody is expected to believe in some kind of god, those who do not are seen as lesser citizens and everybody believes that there is an afterlife, promoting good behaviour. Good family ethics are practiced, children are expected to stay silent and criminals may become 'Bondmen'. These Bondmen are used to serve the community as a whole. The main problem with this (aside from the fact that in practice it would never actually work) is that it would be painfully dull. There would be no diversity or excitment whatsoever.

An introduction to the History and Context of Journalism

Lecture number one begins around 1500 in Italy. The sun is shining, the grass is green, and the Italians are busy helping Europe to create a rennaissance. Art and archaeology flourished in and around this era, as did new forms of teaching such as 'humanism' and 'the new learning'. This encouraged philosophical discussion far more than it had been before, as well as an increase in literature and poetry.

Before this very little had happened culturally , in fact almost nothing had happened for over 1000 years, so surely with these new ideas and ways of life becoming common something had to change. The printing press was the invention to change everything. This was to become the first time that ideas could be captured and made readily available to others. This eventually gave rise to early journalists including Joseph Addison and Daniel Defoe. The impact that the printing press has had on the world is incredible and this is something that often goes unnoticed in our society.

The end of the 16th century up until the end of the 18th century are known as the enlightenment years. It is around these years that ancient philosophical ideas begin to face challenges, for example Plato's theory of forms; the idea that there is a perfect form of everything that can only be accessed through the world of the forms, (surely this is absurd, can there really be a perfect form of mud?) Atheism started becoming more common as did a more modern form of Philosophy arriving from the likes of Descartes and his Cogito (I think therefore I am.)

The key idea that came from this change in Philosophy was the rejection of pluralism and support for the idea that there are universal laws, and only one type of knowledge. This relates closely to Journalism as we must always be sure that we are always aspiring to one type of certain knowledge and one type of truth. We must adopt an empiricist philosophy rather than a rationalist one if we are to succeed in reporting truthfully and accurately. We must look for evidence as opposed to searching our own reason.

In the days that follow i am going to begin reading Bertrand Russel's "A Guide to Western Philosophy" If his famous radio interview with Catholic priest Father Frederick Copleston is anything to go by i am sure this will be an entertaining (yet challenging) task.

A Blog, of reasonably average proportions

Hello, my name is Sam, and worryingly for a journalism student, this is my first blog, I intend to update this throughout the year, keeping you posted on what I'm learning and anything else exciting that is happening in my life, or the life of anybody else of any significance. Ok maybe that's a little broad. Anyway I'm 18, I'm at The University of Winchester and i enjoy a variety of music (from Girls Aloud to Glasvegas via Barry White and The Beach Boys!) I'm also a lover of sport and in particular Football, as a keen Queens Park Rangers fan I tend not to see the beautiful game at it's most beautiful.