Presentation Feedback

So, what do we all think? Was it a success? Obviously there were a few technical difficulties, but I quite liked the irony. It meant we didn’t have to labour the point that, while digital technology can be fantastic (see Tom’s post – the World Service agrees!) it can fail!

 Well done for Peter and his “digital” presentation. I think it made the presentation more varied.

 On reflection, anything you think we should have included that we didn’t? Or anything we did which could have been left out? I’m not convinced about the relevence of the Danish cartoons…

 LC

Belarus

It is true, Belarussians aren’t allowed the internet.

Why do you think this is?

 —

Regarding our presentation I think it went ok. Obviously there was the ironic technical glitch but I guess this shows the true nature of the digital age. I suppose for most people its all quite young technology and so there are bound to be teething problems.

I think we could have looked more closely at specific countries like Belarus and seen if the lack of digital technology, like the internet, has affected press freedom. Then again, I doubt a state that has banned something like the web is likely to have a brilliantly liberal press.

TI

Presenter loves technology

BBC World Service presenter Dan Damon said this on his BBC profile:

“I get most excited using new technology to produce live radio from hostile situations. Be it a roof in Gaza blasted by desert winds, using a slow mobile phone link to read scripts in an Istanbul mosque or propping a satellite dish on a car roof so Mexican voters give their views uncensored. ”

It echoes a lot of what we were saying in our presentation: that technology’s an empowering factor in journalism. Although I suppose you still have to think about the implications of non-responsible journalists having the same access to technology.
Its the same old ‘who regulates it’ question.

TI

Journalist Magazine

It is interesting to see that, as a test, the NUJ’s Journalist magazine is only going to be available in an online edition next month.

From the NUJ website:

The experiment is a chance to see which format members prefer, an announcement in this month’s edition explained.

But this is also a cost-saving strategy, as, according to the union, postage and packaging account for 60 per cent of the cost of the Journalist, which costs the NUJ in excess of £200,000 a year to produce.

It’s really interesting to see how things are adapting to the new media environment. However, as they’ve highlighted, this could just be a cost saving move.

Adios

TI

Pakistan and Youtube.

Hello all.

 Just heard that Pakistan have now banned Youtube after it displayed the “blasphemous Danish cartoons.” Are we surprised?

Is the internet just becomming another thing to ban, as opposed to improving freedom?

LC

Interviewees

Right. Jon Sopel and Ben brown are saved in the shared drive, in the “Lora” file, under “Ethics Pres.” They HAVE been normalized etc, but if you want to fiddle with noise reduction, go ahead.

 Jon Sopel thinks the biggest movement in digital technoloy is citizen technology and the blog. He’s sceptical of their positive contribution. Good phono to use in the presentation.

Ben Brown thinks that digital technology HAS improved press freedom. He thinks that people have easier access to news etc.

Good contrast to use.

I’ll get a phono with the Zimbabwean tomorrow. His accent is quite strong, but I think it’ll be useable.

See you guys this evening.

We need to think of a format for the presentation, and, if you want to use this idea of “digital presentation,” we need to work out who’s doing what, and how.

 LC 

Al-Jazeera

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7247182.stm

 Check it out!

 LC

Digital Technology and Newspapers.

So, with regards to broadcast media, it’s pretty obvious to see that digital technology (bluetooth/mobile phones/blackberries/satellites/all the other things we’ve been talking about) has helped to improve their broadcasts.The “Updated Every Minute” BBC advert shows how up-to-date that particular organization sees itself to be. I’m not convinced it’s especially improved press freedom – it might have made reports more accurate, getting to the audience much faster, but, in the context of the UK, I don’t think it’s made much difference to press freedom.

One thing I think we’ll struggle to demonstrate is how digital technology has improved printed press freedom/affected printed press. While newspapers now have websites, that seems to be the extent of their use of digital technology. I might well be wrong. Print journalists can email their reports to their editor from a press conference/court case. But their deadlines are less immediate than in broadcast, so has this made any difference at all?

(I found a Cypriot newspaper which has now launched an international version of their paper thanks to the internet. http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:-265HnZZHpUJ:www.freemedia.at/cms/ipi/freedom_detail.html%3Fcountry%3D/KW0001/KW0003/KW0055/%26year%3D2000+digital+technology+improving+press+freedom&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4&gl=uk )

I’ll ask the Zimbabwean journalist I’m talking to this week. And the two BBC jounos I’m talking to. Any chance one of you could do a phono (or live if it’s a local paper – film it?) with a print journalist, asking if they think digital technology has improved press freedom in print journalism, or whether it’s just made their stories more convenient to file? 

Are we including editing tools in this? Adobe Audition/whatever it is we use to edit video mean that we don’t have to sit and slice up tape anymore. It’s digital. It’s faster. But that means we can play with what people say more…so does this improve freedom, or make us more tempted to edit their words, changing their meaning, going in the opposite direction to freedom? (Maybe find an example of one naughty programme/paper/station that cut out a “not” from a sentence, changingthe meaning of what someone’s said?) We could also record one of us saying one thing, then edit it to say something completely different – showing how it can be abused?

Same with photo journalism. Digital technology makes it easier to fake photos. Or maybe we could just do a section on how digital technology has been abused?

Now we know what our topic REALLY is, I was thinking we could use digital technology as part of the presentation, and have one or more of us presenting from afar, via phone, live video link, etc. We’d need to enlist techno-help, but I think it’s do-able!

LC

The danish cartoon controversy

In the debate over digital technology having an effort to defend and improve press and broadcasting freedom, it is important to refer to the saga of the danish cartoons which were published in Jyllands Posten, danemark’s largest newspaper. When they were published in 2005, there was widespread hostility amongst muslims to the danish cartoons and many danish embassies were sacked across the muslim world. the british media to some extent practicised a kind of self censorship, describing the cartoons, but never actually depicting them. This was in stark contrast to many countries  of europe which did publish the cartoons in 2005. However, in 2008, with a plot to assasinate the danish cartoonist being uncovered in danemark, Jyllands posten again reprinted the danish cartoons. Again, there have been protests in the muslim world, and again the british media has refused to publish the cartoons, preferring to describe them. 

This self censorship by the british media could be argued to limit press freedom, as even though the cartoons could be construed as being offensive, it is very much a matter of personal taste as to whether we live in a free and open society which tolerates diverging opinoins which may be offensive to certain minority groups. 

However, on the internet, press freedom is unlimited, on the gay patriot website, the cartoons are easily accessible

     http://www.gaypatriot.net/

The comments accompanying this photo may be judged to be racist by certain sectors of society, however, the essential point that needs to be made is that the internet – digital technology is allowing people to see images or words that may be considered offensive by the majority. It is also important to note a crucial distinction between carictureures and images that cause  people real harm. the caricutures caused offence and lead to a widespread anti danish and anti european backlash amongst some muslims. it could be argued that Jyllands posten has a long history of anti minority feeling, it is supporting of the current danish goverment and its ally in the danish parliament, the danish people’s party. It also praised Hitler and called the jews a ‘problem in german society’. therefore, it could be stated that Jyllands Posten  is continuing the tradition of whipping up anti immigrant sentiment, or exposing fear of the ‘other’ to gain circulation. However, the internet is enabling UK audiences to view caricutureal images that the mainstream media either does not want to show or is uncomfortable about showing. Therefore, it could be argued that press freedoms are being enhanced by the internet.

Therefore

Countries

So do we all have our countries and info for tomorrow? We won’t have long to do it so we have to know exactly what to do.

T.I.