Lecture Ten: Agenda Setting

In today’s lecture we learned how the media constructs reality, otherwise known as agenda setting. We were given a simple definition which basically states that an individual’s conception of reality is socially constructed through a process of communication using shared language. Reality does in fact exist, however, how we perceive it is socially mediated. The key players in constructing this social reality are the media.

There are four agendas that the media has: Public agenda, policy agenda, corporate agenda and media agenda. All four agendas are inter-related and used by the media.
From the lecture the main point that I found was that the media influences stories and has the ability to shape and filter the stories so that the public views them in a certain way. The news story hierarchy of importance is also shaped by the media. By having a heavy concentration on certain stories, the public will begin to see these stories as more important than others.

Two main types of agenda setting were identified:

First level agenda setting theory: The media suggests what the public should focus on through coverage.

Second level agenda setting theory: The media suggests how people should think about an issue.

It is obvious that the media has tight control over what the public gets to hear about in terms of the news. Not only can they control what we view, but at times how we think about certain stories. This can be achieved by simply presenting a story a certain way. This quote from Bernard Cohen sums it up perfectly: “The press may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about.” The media do it because they can. It’s as simple as that.

Lecture Nine: News Values

News values were the focus of this week’s lecture and were defined as ‘the degree of prominence a news outlet gives a story and the attention that is paid by the audience.’ Essentially, it is the amount of coverage a news story is given.
Dr Redman explained that News Value can be determined by the following categories.

1)      Impact: does it make the reader sit up and listen?

2)      Audience identification: does the story relate to what’s happening in the world?

3)      Pragmatics: ethics, practice and current affairs

4)      Source influence

5)      Emotional value

6)      Follow-up

7)      Celebrity status

Different organisations however, may hold emotional value to a higher importance, whereas another may value celebrity status more.

We were also introduced to the 12 newsworthiness factors crated by Professor Johan Galtung. Galtung analysed news from around the world and discovered that 12 factors featured prominently:

·         Negativity: Bad news i.e. death tragedy and natural disasters

·         Close to home: audiences with close proximity relate better

·         Recency: revealing stories as they happen

·         Currency: story that has been in the public eye for some time

·         Continuity: events that are likely to have a continuing impact

·         Uniqueness

·         Simplicity

·         Personality

·         Predictability

·         Elite nations or people

·         Exclusivity

·         Size

Following on from this Galtung contracted three hypotheses:

Additivity hypothesis: The more factors a story satisfies, the more likely it will become news

Complementarity hypothesis: The factors will tend to exclude each other

Exclusion hypothesis: Those stories which satisfy few or none of the factors will not become news.

Finally, we examined idea that ‘if it bleeds it leads’. This simply means that if the event is under tragic circumstances i.e. murder, abduction, disaster, then it is likely to be a leading story. Unfortunately these are the kinds of stories that the public wants to hear about and can be examined by simply switching on the 6 o’clock news. The same can be said for local stories as people are more inclined to listen if they feel they have a personal connection to the story. If not an immediate connection, they generally know a friend of friend.

A year without school....

So it has been nearly a year since I exited the school gates for the last time. Last night I was reflecting on how my life has changed since I left school.

There have been some great things that have come once I ditched my uniform. Obviously I started university where I got to dictate my timetable, was able to sleep in two hours later than I used to and I got to learn about something I was actually interested in. I have had more time to see my friends during the day and do nice things together i.e. go out for a coffee. There is also this beautiful thing where we get a 3 month break over the Summer to ‘re-charge’ our batteries. I also now have more money thanks to a timetable that is far more accommodating. However, there are some things that I’ll admit I have found to be a bit difficult since finishing school.

Firstly, no one cares if you don’t show up to class. There’s no frantic teacher on the phone to Mum demanding to know why you didn’t show up. I no longer have school to use as an excuse for not being able to fill in at work. There’s a lot more assumed knowledge at uni and the standard of work is much higher. And whoever said that uni is easier than school is an absolute liar.

On the whole though, I really do enjoy post-school life a lot more than school itself. I’ll gladly accept more responsibility in exchange for no more uniforms, sleep-ins and more of a social life any day thank you very much….

The Art of Interpretive Dance

If you haven’t yet seen David Armand’s interpretive dance segment on T.V’s Fast and Loose, then you are seriously missing out. David uses his body to interpret the lyrics of popular songs to audience members. The catch is they can’t hear the song at all. All that they have to guess the song is David’s carefully practiced interpretations. This video will have you in hysterics and asking how the hell does he move so quickly??

A Parisian Adventure

In early October I, along with my family, went on the trip of a lifetime to Paris, France. Rather than bore you all to tears with a word for word account of our adventure, I thought I’d tell the story through some of the photos we took. Enjoy!!

Lecture Eight: Ethics

At the lecture this week we were lucky enough to have Donna Meiklejohn as a guest lecturer. Her lengthy career as a journalist enabled her to provide an interesting insight into the ethical struggles that we will face as journalists.

We first looked at advertisements that have caused controversy with the words or images that have been chosen for certain campaigns. The image below was brought on screen causing some students to gasp or raise their eyebrows. This ignited the discussion as to whether using controversy to make a point is ethically okay. I for one thought the ad was clever, effective and definitely got the point across. My ethical radar said it was fine. However, the plot thickens when journalists throw people into the ethical debate.

 

 

 

 

 

 Donna told us a story of how she, as a young journalist, was asked to interview the grieving family of three young boys who had been electrocuted. This task would’ve proved daunting for anyone, let alone a journalist with little experience. Donna described how her moral compass told her that requesting an interview from the family was wrong. However, when she put it in to the perspective that she was just doing her job and that this would help pay her bills, she knew she had to get the interview. Donna’s advice was to put the job into perspective and not get carried away with the emotional side of the story. I know I will find this particularly challenging as a rookie journalist; however, it will obviously get easier with practice. As journalists we are lucky enough to have ethics codes to justify our work. These include: Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance, Public Relations Institute of Australia and Australian Association of National Advertisers.

We discussed three ethical theories that might aid us in making our decisions as future journalists.

Consequentialism: This is the theory that focuses on outcomes. E.g. It might be uncomfortable for you at the time, but in the end will this be for the better?

Virtue: This is the idea of right and wrong. You have to ask yourself if the decision you are about to make coincide with your values.

Deontology: This theory is simply following the rules and guidelines so that you do the right thing. Most journalists will follow this theory on most reporting assignments.

In conclusion, it is obvious that as a journalist I will be faced with some moral minefields. However, at the end of the day I must remember that by reporting on the story I am just doing my job. I have to pay my bills somehow!!

Lecture Seven: Public Media

It could be said that public media are the ‘do gooders’ of the media world. Their mission is simple: serve and engage a public. On the local front we have the ABC and SBS as our Australian representatives. These public media producers dabble in both radio and television production. Internationally, BBC, PBS and TVNZ are just three of a number of public media producers.

To put it frankly the aforementioned production companies care about us, the viewers, more than their friends in commercial media do. Public value is at the core of production and has three main guidelines:

1.       Must embed public service ethos

2.       Must have value for licence fee money

3.       Public value weighs more than media impact

The public media doesn’t have a biased view either as it should be distanced from all vested interests and from those of the government. Its primary functions are nation focused and aim to promote nation building, national heritage, national identity and ignite national conversations.

In order to find the profits lost from lack of advertising on their networks and lack of funding, public media has seen some commercialisation. The ABC Shop, ABC Commercial and BBC Worldwide are all fine examples.

The most important element in Public Media is the good old news. And a less biased version at that!! Public media’s news style is something you either love or hate. It is typically serious, broadsheet style, reports on importance rather than interest, quick and unchecked, boring to some, elitist, of limited interest, poorly presented and out of touch. Some of the issues listed are a direct result of lack of profit.

Consequently, public media has a lengthy to do list if it wants to attract more viewers.

THINGS TO DO 

·         Produce quality

·         Make themselves relevant

·         Engage with democratic press

·         Inform the public

·         Be independent

It’s a long list and the future of public media depends on whether the list is completed sooner rather than later.