Journalism is the business of turning information, into money" -Chris Horrie
So when did all this journalism business start? The world has come a long way today, the language we use must have originated somewhere, and many historical events have shaped the way we share and receive information.
So lets take a look back at the beginning of Journalism:
6000 BC: The first language is formed: Chinese. Their pictographic script gave symbols a meaning, which was taught to others as a way of communication.
http://img.chinaa2z.com/uploadpic/learn/Sinology/2008/20081226/20081226152010712143/1230276366.jpg
4000 BC: Egyptian hieroglyphics: This was also a symbolic, picture based language.
http://www.jimloy.com/hiero/yourname.gif
3800 BC: Summarian Cuneiform script: This was a breakthrough in language, as it used abstract strokes and lines to form words, rather than pictures and symbols.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/89/254519011_79d693fa8f_o.jpg
740 BC: Lindisfarne Gospel: A manuscript written in a way based on latinate characters.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/tyne/content/images/2006/11/24/lindisfarne_gospel_331x470.jpg
1440s: Guttenburg's printing press: The glorious inventions which keeps journo's in a job!http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/french/sable/recherche/catalogues/annual_register/images/printing_press.jpg
1460s: The Italian Renassiance: This has been covered in previous blog entries.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance
1517: Martin Luther's 95 Theses: Regarded as a catalyst for the Protestant Reformation
http://www.spurgeon.org/~phil/history/95theses.htm
1540: King Henry VIII: Need I say more? What a tyrant!
http://www.woodlands-junior.kent.sch.uk/Homework/Tudors/henrytimeline.htm
1563: Foxe's book of Martyrs: A work of the Reformation.
http://www.biblestudytools.com/History/AD/FoxsBookofMartyrs/
1564-1569: Sir John Hawkins, the first English slave trader (2000 in the WIndies by 1600)
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/TUDhawkinsJ.htm
1588: Spanish Armada: King Phillip felt like invading us, because he was skint?http://www.britainexpress.com/History/tudor/armada.htm
1620: The Mayflower: Pilgrims travelled to the "New World". Transport is improving!http://americanhistory.suite101.com/article.cfm/themayflowerreachesamerica
1641-1651: English Civil War: England went to war...with itself.
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~crossby/ECW/
1651: The Navigation Acts (War with the Dutch merchants) Lasts almost 100 years.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navigation_Acts
1660: Restoration: Charles II restored the monastries in England, Scotland and Ireland.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Restoration
1667: John Locke: An Essay Into Human Understanding: I'm not going into all this again!http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/locke/
1688: The Glorious Revolution: I dont need to write anything, because this site does it for me.
http://www.thegloriousrevolution.org/
1690: Battle of the Boyne: Everyone began picking on poor Ireland...
http://www.irelandseye.com/aarticles/history/events/dates/ch5.shtm
1698: Royal Africa Company chartered (Slave/ penal labour trade ‘privatised’)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_African_Company
1700: The Birth of Isaac Newton: A very influential part of modern life.
http://www.newton.ac.uk/newtlife.html
1702: The Daily Courant: The first national newspaper is created and published nationally.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Courant
1703: Daniel Defoe: Writer. Journalist. Pamphleteer. This guy's got it all!http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jdefoe.htm
1704: Final collapse of the Darien Scheme (Mercantile Scottish colony - bankruptcy). http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/Scotland-History/DarienScheme.htm
1707: Act of Union with Scotland - Robert Burns
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7ncizeO2jk
1709: The Spectator/The Tatler: Birth of Periodical Press, more info soon on Journalism Now.
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/5428/Joseph-Addison/45/The-Tatler-and-The-Spectator
1719: Daniel Defoe - Robinson Crusoe (500 books and pamphlets, English spy)http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jdefoe.htm
1729 - Irish Famine - Swift, A Modest Proposal
http://art-bin.com/art/omodest.html
1731: Hogarth-Gin Alley: The first of photojournalism.
http://dougboren.homestead.com/files/400ginlane.jpg
1745: Battle of Culloden (failed Jacobite revolt - end of tribal society in Great Britain)http://www.britishbattles.com/battle_of_culloden.htm
1759: Adam Smith : Theory of Moral Sentiments
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Theory_of_Moral_Sentiments
1775: Samuel Johnsons Dictionary: The first English Dictionary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Dictionary_of_the_English_Language
1776: American Revolution: "A unique and radical event"
http://www.theamericanrevolution.org/
1776: Adam Smith : The Wealth of Nations
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wealth_of_Nations
1783: The Zong case - English law holds that slaves are not people, but livestock
http://wilberforce.1kit.com/1kit/SlaveShip/TheZong/tabid/3799/Default.aspx
1789: French Revolution: If the Americans got one, the French wanted one to.
http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/h33-fr.html
1815: Battle of Waterloo: Another battle, after Napolean was forced to abdicate.
http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/waterloo.htm
1830: William Cobbett: Rural Rides
http://www.visionofbritain.org.uk/text/contents_page.jsp?t_id=Cobbett
1831: The Baptist War (slave revolt in Jamaica - nb - continuous resistance to slavery)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptist_War
1832: Parliamentary Reform Bill - political power shifts to the manufacturing towns, the north
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PR1832.htm
1833: Abolition of Slavery in the British Empire (Emancipation of West Indian slaves)http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Lslavery33.htm
1846: Repeal of the Corn Laws (final end of mercantile system). http://www.victorianweb.org/history/cornlaws2.html
1850s: Manchester: Peak of factory system/Free Trade/Industrial Revolution/Liberalism.
http://www.manchester2002-uk.com/history/victorian/Victorian1.html
Wednesday 28 October 2009
Media Law: Confidentiality
Whilst studying libel, I learnt that in court cases, the offending person does not have to prove that they have been harmed by the defamation, but prove beyond reasonable doubt, that the publication could cause harm to them. With privacy, the person has to prove that they have been harmed in some way. For example, businessmen must prove that their company has lost money due to the breach of confidentiality.
The 3 main areas of concern regarding confidentiality are:
- State Secrets (e.g Government, Army)
- Commercial Secrets
- Privacy
The law states that a person who has obtained information in confidence must not take unfair advantage of it.
The 3 elements of a breach of confidence are:
- The information must have "necessary quality of confidence"
- The information must have been imparted in circumstances imposing an obligation of confidence
- The unauthorised information is detrimental to the party communicating it.
All of the above must occur together in order for it to be a breach of confidentiality.
People who believe they will have their confidence breached can ask for an injunction. Judges can grant injunctions preventing all publications from printing confidential information.
Disobeying and injunction can result in an action for contempt of court.
Courts use breach of confidence actions to prevent "the unjustified publication of private information"
Courts can also order journalists to reveal the name of their source who provided them with confidential information.
Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights guarantee the right to privacy. The most favoured way to protect privacy has been the action for breach of confidence.
Judges are prepared to infer a relationship requiring confidentiality where no other obvious relationship exists. They also ask whether the claimant had "a reasonable expectation of privacy"
However, the good news for the journalists is that there is a defence that publication is in the public interest.
A Journo's Guide On How Not To Breach Confidence
Step 1: Announce that you are a journalist
Step 2: Provide details of the publication
Step 3: Warn persons involved of breach of confidence. Treat them like idiots to make them understand that information they may divulge, if published, may lead to them losing their jobs, and generally ruining their lives.
Gagging Clauses: If a person is employed by another, they owe the employer a common law "duty of confidence" even if it is not specified in the contract. This secrecy could extend to matters of public concern. In these cases, there is a duty to report this to the employer.
The concept of public interest, in basic terms, is the opposite of malice.
The Press Complaints Commission (PCC) define code of conduct in the following ways:
- Material that exposed crime when police have failed to do so.
- Exposing harm to the community
- Public being misled
Below is a link for Public Concern At Work, otherwise known as whistleblowers:
http://www.pcaw.co.uk/
Important cases into this topic are:
Graham Pink- NHS worker fired for highlighting poor hospital conditions.
Bill Goodwin- Journalist who refused to identify a source in court.
Wednesday 21 October 2009
Seminar Paper on John Locke
John Locke: 1632-1704 was a hugely influential writer, and is considered to be the first Empricist, claiming that the mind is like a blank slate at birth. Empiricism is the theory of knowledge that believes that knowledge comes from experience, unlike philosophers such as Descartes who believed in innate ideas. Believers of innate ideas believe that the mind is born with knowledge and ideas. “Epitome to the Treatise” printed in 1688 was condemned by many people because it denied innate ideas.
Locke was born and baptised on 29th August in Wrington, Somerset, about 10 miles away from my home town of Weston-super-Mare.
Locke’s father, also named John, worked in the Parliamentary Army against the royalists during the civil war, and fled to Holland in 1683 after the Rye House Plot to assassinate King Charles II and his brother James. Locke was concerned about James II coming to the throne, and so stayed in the Netherlands until the Glorious Revolution. This was when James II was overthrown by Parliamentarians and William of Orange, who took the throne.
Quote: “The commonwealth of learning is not at this time without master-builders, whose mighty designs, in advancing the sciences, will leave lasting monuments to the admiration of posterity: but every one must not hope to be a Boyle or a Sydenham; and in an age that produces such masters as the great Huygenius and the incomparable Mr. Newton, with some others of that strain, it is ambition enough to be employed as an under-labourer in clearing the ground a little, and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way to knowledge”
Locke knew all these men and their work, therefore, describing himself as an “under-labourer” may not just be him being modest but also may be the contrast between their positive achievements, and his own personal attempts to show the inadequacies of other Philosophers, such as Aristotle and Socrates.
The Essay originated in 1671 when, as Locke mentions, a group of five or six friends met to discuss a point in philosophy. Difficulties arose and Locke proposed a prior inquiry: ‘to examine our own abilities, and see what objects our understanding were, or werenot, fitted to deal with’
John Locke is a very modest man. In the beginning of Epistle to the Reader he points out that this is not a “commendation” of his work, nor assume that because he enjoyed writing it, he too enjoys the finished product. He also comments further on that he is not ignorant because he has not extensively mentioned his good reputation. He also warns that the essay is purely made up of his thoughts, ideas and experiences, and that he did not publish the essay in order to be credited by scholars or other “masters of knowledge”. The Essay was published as Locke was persuaded that it would help others like himself. It is for this reason, Locke says, that he feels it necessary to make the information has “easy and intelligible” as possible...(Ha!)
After reading and scrutinizing this essay in order to write this paper, I have come to admire John Locke, as he has published this essay specifically to help others, and has aimed at truth and useful information. However, he also shows understanding that all people are different, and that his work will not please everyone, and those that are offended by his work can do what they want, because quite frankly, he doesn’t care, and would not waste his time having such a conversation with them.
As mentioned previously, Locke believes in Empiricism, that knowledge is gained from experience, and believed that the mind is the most important part in the soul, as it has the ability to acquire knowledge. “Every step the mind takes in its progress towards Knowledge makes some discovery”
Locke compares the mind to the eye, as only things we see can affect us, and please us, as the things we don’t see are unknown. Therefore the things we learn can please us, whereas we cannot regret knowledge we have not yet acquired, as it is unknown. Locke also points out that those of us who go beyond the norm to seek knowledge (as scientists, mathematicians etc did) will be rewarded for it, as he believes that knowledge causes feelings of pleasure. This is how he describes himself, as someone who has taken his thoughts and transferred them to paper. Perhaps originally only intended to be a series of note-taking has turned into one of Locke’s most influential works: An Essay of Human Understanding.
Locke also claims that those that follow other people’s thoughts are not following truth, suggesting that the search for knowledge is a personal experience.
As we have previously learnt, Descartes liked to be certain of things, without any doubt. Locke also follows this example, as he believes in everything he has mentioned in his works. He also states that he is liable to have made errors and mistakes, and that the book is not aimed at those who already have extensive knowledge of the subject, therefore may not be “new or instructive” as the text was originally written for Locke’s personal use for him and his friends. He supports this by commenting on how he would write parts of the book and then neglect it for long periods of time until he could be bothered to continue. It was not until his retirement that he finished the essay.
Locke says that writing in this way proved that some sections have too much information and others, too little. He at first assumed that his thoughts on the matter would only fill one sheet of paper, but his thoughts branched out and lead onto new discoveries. It would therefore have been possible to shorten the Essay, but Locke said he was now “too busy or too lazy”
Locke then goes on to comment on certain changes made in the different editions of his work, such as the Epitome of the Treatise, printed in 1688, was condemned by many people, without it even being read, as it denied innate ideas.
Locke was born and baptised on 29th August in Wrington, Somerset, about 10 miles away from my home town of Weston-super-Mare.
Locke’s father, also named John, worked in the Parliamentary Army against the royalists during the civil war, and fled to Holland in 1683 after the Rye House Plot to assassinate King Charles II and his brother James. Locke was concerned about James II coming to the throne, and so stayed in the Netherlands until the Glorious Revolution. This was when James II was overthrown by Parliamentarians and William of Orange, who took the throne.
Quote: “The commonwealth of learning is not at this time without master-builders, whose mighty designs, in advancing the sciences, will leave lasting monuments to the admiration of posterity: but every one must not hope to be a Boyle or a Sydenham; and in an age that produces such masters as the great Huygenius and the incomparable Mr. Newton, with some others of that strain, it is ambition enough to be employed as an under-labourer in clearing the ground a little, and removing some of the rubbish that lies in the way to knowledge”
Locke knew all these men and their work, therefore, describing himself as an “under-labourer” may not just be him being modest but also may be the contrast between their positive achievements, and his own personal attempts to show the inadequacies of other Philosophers, such as Aristotle and Socrates.
The Essay originated in 1671 when, as Locke mentions, a group of five or six friends met to discuss a point in philosophy. Difficulties arose and Locke proposed a prior inquiry: ‘to examine our own abilities, and see what objects our understanding were, or werenot, fitted to deal with’
John Locke is a very modest man. In the beginning of Epistle to the Reader he points out that this is not a “commendation” of his work, nor assume that because he enjoyed writing it, he too enjoys the finished product. He also comments further on that he is not ignorant because he has not extensively mentioned his good reputation. He also warns that the essay is purely made up of his thoughts, ideas and experiences, and that he did not publish the essay in order to be credited by scholars or other “masters of knowledge”. The Essay was published as Locke was persuaded that it would help others like himself. It is for this reason, Locke says, that he feels it necessary to make the information has “easy and intelligible” as possible...(Ha!)
After reading and scrutinizing this essay in order to write this paper, I have come to admire John Locke, as he has published this essay specifically to help others, and has aimed at truth and useful information. However, he also shows understanding that all people are different, and that his work will not please everyone, and those that are offended by his work can do what they want, because quite frankly, he doesn’t care, and would not waste his time having such a conversation with them.
As mentioned previously, Locke believes in Empiricism, that knowledge is gained from experience, and believed that the mind is the most important part in the soul, as it has the ability to acquire knowledge. “Every step the mind takes in its progress towards Knowledge makes some discovery”
Locke compares the mind to the eye, as only things we see can affect us, and please us, as the things we don’t see are unknown. Therefore the things we learn can please us, whereas we cannot regret knowledge we have not yet acquired, as it is unknown. Locke also points out that those of us who go beyond the norm to seek knowledge (as scientists, mathematicians etc did) will be rewarded for it, as he believes that knowledge causes feelings of pleasure. This is how he describes himself, as someone who has taken his thoughts and transferred them to paper. Perhaps originally only intended to be a series of note-taking has turned into one of Locke’s most influential works: An Essay of Human Understanding.
Locke also claims that those that follow other people’s thoughts are not following truth, suggesting that the search for knowledge is a personal experience.
As we have previously learnt, Descartes liked to be certain of things, without any doubt. Locke also follows this example, as he believes in everything he has mentioned in his works. He also states that he is liable to have made errors and mistakes, and that the book is not aimed at those who already have extensive knowledge of the subject, therefore may not be “new or instructive” as the text was originally written for Locke’s personal use for him and his friends. He supports this by commenting on how he would write parts of the book and then neglect it for long periods of time until he could be bothered to continue. It was not until his retirement that he finished the essay.
Locke says that writing in this way proved that some sections have too much information and others, too little. He at first assumed that his thoughts on the matter would only fill one sheet of paper, but his thoughts branched out and lead onto new discoveries. It would therefore have been possible to shorten the Essay, but Locke said he was now “too busy or too lazy”
Locke then goes on to comment on certain changes made in the different editions of his work, such as the Epitome of the Treatise, printed in 1688, was condemned by many people, without it even being read, as it denied innate ideas.
Defamation Cases
I have found a site with a list of court cases ranging from the 1800s to the millenium.
http://www.swarb.co.uk/liscindex.php
Click the link
Scroll Down to "Defamation"
Pick a time scale.
Check out the "Media" section too, but please note that not all of these cases will be relevant to the Journalism course.
http://www.swarb.co.uk/liscindex.php
Click the link
Scroll Down to "Defamation"
Pick a time scale.
Check out the "Media" section too, but please note that not all of these cases will be relevant to the Journalism course.
Media Law: Qualified Privilege
This blog post will be shorter than many others, as I have found a link that explains Qualified Privilege better than I ever could:
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/right-of-free-expression/defamation/qualified-privilege.html
The bullet points at the bottom are known as the 10-point test, and are very important in journalism, as any publication that follows every point can use qualified privilege as a defence.
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/yourrights/right-of-free-expression/defamation/qualified-privilege.html
The bullet points at the bottom are known as the 10-point test, and are very important in journalism, as any publication that follows every point can use qualified privilege as a defence.
Thursday 15 October 2009
History and Philosophy: The story so far
Reading: Bertrand Russel "A History of Human Philosophy"
John Locke: "Epistle To The Reader"
John Locke: "Epistle To The Reader"
The history and philosophy lectures began by talking about the Italian Renaissance, which brought around the ideas of ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato. During this time, Hobbes spoke about the state of nature and asked what the world was like before law and government, and concluded that society would disintegrate into chaos. At this time, nobody believed in government, but without a ruler the world would become so unbearable that the members of society would come together to elect a ruler. This was the beginning of the social contract, which was an agreement between the people and the ruler, allowing the ruler dictatorship.
Another important figure in our lectures is Descartes, known as the first "modern" philosopher. He believed that ancient philosophers such as Plato and Aristotle were very influential. Descartes wanted to change intellectual society, and believed that some things wern't true, and so tried to develop a way that everything he believed was true, without any doubt. He came to the conclusion that when everything was stripped down, all that was left was the mind, and thoughts. Hence his idea: "I think, therefore I am" (cognito irgo sum). He also believed that he was inferior to God, and that an inferior being cannot have any concept of a perfect superior being, unless God had implanted the idea in us.
Next we come onto the philosopher that this week's lecture was based on John Locke -------------------------------------> He is considered to be a hugely influential writer, and is known to be the first empiricist. This means he values experience over innate ideas, as opposed to Descartes. Locke was very influential on political events following the publishing of his books. At this time, there were 2 ideas dominating policitcal thinking:
Catholic Kings believed in The Divine Right of Kings, as they believed they could do no wrong, as they had been chosen by God. However, others (including Hobbes) believed that the power should lie with the people, although agreed that the people needed a ruler, as without it, people's dominant passions will produce war.
Other philosophers had ideas on how to order society in a certain way. For example, More's Utopia.
The Social Contract was developed by Locke, so that the power rested with the people, but they give it up to a chosen leader.
Locke wrote "The Treatise of Government". The first treatise attacks the divine right of kings, on the basis that God gave Adam the power to rule. The second treatise focuses on the state of nature, and the idea that everyone enjoys natural freedom and equality, but obey natural laws. The laws of nature were moral laws which every man knew knew intuitively, i.e. the right to protect your property.
Locke also wrote "The Manual For Revolution", which was used in the American Constitution. Locke proposed a concept of government by consent and limited by law-it's powers mainly for the protection of property. He insisted that taxes could not be levied without the consent of the majority of society's consent. He believed that citizens could rebel if their Government ceased to respect the law-referring to the tyranny of James II. Therefore, Locke was suggesting that the right of revolution was one of the natural rights of man. Society gave the government power to help run society, but keep their human rights.
Locke believed our human understanding comes from our experience, which is worked on by our powers of reason to produce real knowledge. He was against "innate ideas". He thought that God had given mankind the ability to discover knowledge and morality so that innate ideas were not necessary.
Examples of innate ideas are:
- Plato's forms-the soul becomes aware of the forms and so had knowledge before birth.
- Descartes-immaterial soul with innate ideas imprinted by God.
However, Locke believed that before ideas are known, there is nothing in them in the mind but a capacity to know them. It seems that Locke has a lot of opposing ideas to Descartes, although they both believe that there is very little that we can know for certain.
According to Locke; when matters of faith go beyond reason and experience, individuals should be guided by private revelation which should never be imposed by the Church or State. Religion should be kept separate from the Government.
Locke saw his work as clearing the way for upcoming scientists such as Newton.
For those of you that are too bored to continue reading, check out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOJnhRCzH90 for more information on Newton.
Newton achieved great things in his lifetime. Due to the plague, he left University for 2 years, where he discovered his law of gravity and 3 laws of motion, as well as inventing the infinitesimal calculus, and building the foundations of modern optics. After the plague, Newton returned to University, but did not tell anyone of his discoveries. He wrote a book in 1687, a mathematical demonstration of the Copernican hypothesis proposed by Kepler, which states that the Earth is not the centre of the Universe, but revolved around the Sun. For the first time, Newton convinced people that the world was ordered and knowable.
Newton said that natural philosophy can only demonstrate that a certain force operates on the world, not why. This idea was attacked by the Carthesians (followers of Descartes) as science should not make things up, it should admit ignorance when it does not have data. Newton also believed that the Universe demonstrated God's freedom and omnipotence.
Tuesday 13 October 2009
Media Law: Defamation
The key to understanding the term "Libel" is the ability to tell the difference between fact and opinion, or comment.
As Chris Horrie put it: "Comment is bollocks" which basically means that people are permitted to have their own comments, but in the journalism world they should not be published, unless stated as comments. In journalism all facts must be checked and verified before publication, and journalists must not tell lies!
Another thing that journalists must never do is show malice. This is the ultimate sin. In libel cases, no defence will be accepted if malice can be proved.
Interesting fact: Paedophilia is the most defamatory claim. The reputation of a paedophile is worse than that of a murderer.
Going back to the difference between fact and comment, it is also important to understand that fact and truth are also different. For example, in Aristotles' time, there were 5 planets. This is a fact, however now we have discovered 8 planets (Pluto having been declassified). Therefore this fact was not the truth.
Reputation
Every adult has a reputation in the eyes of those that know him or her, or those that are in the public eye, and some people believe that their reputation is worth a lot of money. On the other hand, some people have "no reputation to lose", meaning that the person is already so badly thought of, nothing could make it any worse. Likewise, corpses have no reputation, and so cannot be libelled against.
If something you say may damage a persons' reputation, then you have "defamed" them. This can be explained as a non-criminal theft or destruction of reputation. If the defamation is in a non-permanent form, and is said to a third person, then this is slander, however, is a person is defamed in a "permanent" form, and if they are clearly identified, then they have been libelled.
Journalists in the UK are subject to the strictest libel laws in the world. This can be dangerous to international journalists, due to the developing area of libel on the internet. Online publication counts as a permanent form, and so journalists in other countries, although may be safe under that countrys' libel laws, can be sued over online publication constituting libel in the UK.
However, UK libel law is weighted more to the complainant than any other country, and so if an article is safe in London, it is probably safe throughout the world.
It is not only journalists who can be sued for libel over a story. The person who has been libelled against may sue the publisher/broadcaster, the author/writer, the distributor, and anyone else responsible for spreading the defamation.
Libel Summary
Libel requires:
As Chris Horrie put it: "Comment is bollocks" which basically means that people are permitted to have their own comments, but in the journalism world they should not be published, unless stated as comments. In journalism all facts must be checked and verified before publication, and journalists must not tell lies!
Another thing that journalists must never do is show malice. This is the ultimate sin. In libel cases, no defence will be accepted if malice can be proved.
Interesting fact: Paedophilia is the most defamatory claim. The reputation of a paedophile is worse than that of a murderer.
Going back to the difference between fact and comment, it is also important to understand that fact and truth are also different. For example, in Aristotles' time, there were 5 planets. This is a fact, however now we have discovered 8 planets (Pluto having been declassified). Therefore this fact was not the truth.
Reputation
Every adult has a reputation in the eyes of those that know him or her, or those that are in the public eye, and some people believe that their reputation is worth a lot of money. On the other hand, some people have "no reputation to lose", meaning that the person is already so badly thought of, nothing could make it any worse. Likewise, corpses have no reputation, and so cannot be libelled against.
If something you say may damage a persons' reputation, then you have "defamed" them. This can be explained as a non-criminal theft or destruction of reputation. If the defamation is in a non-permanent form, and is said to a third person, then this is slander, however, is a person is defamed in a "permanent" form, and if they are clearly identified, then they have been libelled.
Journalists in the UK are subject to the strictest libel laws in the world. This can be dangerous to international journalists, due to the developing area of libel on the internet. Online publication counts as a permanent form, and so journalists in other countries, although may be safe under that countrys' libel laws, can be sued over online publication constituting libel in the UK.
However, UK libel law is weighted more to the complainant than any other country, and so if an article is safe in London, it is probably safe throughout the world.
It is not only journalists who can be sued for libel over a story. The person who has been libelled against may sue the publisher/broadcaster, the author/writer, the distributor, and anyone else responsible for spreading the defamation.
Libel Summary
Libel requires:
- Defamation
- Publication
- Identification
1. Defamation
Libel is the only type of civil case that is tried with a jury, who decides if the content was defamatory. However, juries are becoming less important as more people are settling out of court. The jury in these cases have to follow certain guidelines that a statement is defamatory if it merely tends to lower a person's reputation in any of the following ways:
- Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt
- Causes them to be shunned or avoided
- Discredits them in their trade
- Generally lowers them in the eyes of society
The danger lies for journalists, in publishing something that sounds innocent and fair, but falls foul of the defamatory definition.
"Accidental libel" can be used as a defence, if a correction is made promptly, but Civil Law is all about measuring the damage done and calculating compensation.
Important Note: Defamation Is Not The Same As Lies!
Journalism is a form of writing with consequences.
Falsehood is not necessarily defamatory; and defamatory remarks are often true. However, just because something is true does not mean it is not defamatory. However true defamatory remarks make a good defence and gives justification for saying it.
2. Publication
As mentioned above, libel laws differ between cultures, however online publication may break libel laws in a different country to the one in which it was written or published.
3. Identification
There are a few billion people in the world, and many of them will share similar characteristics. For example, a defamatory article about John Smith is liable to be sued by every John Smith alive. This is the same for small groups and organisations. "A bent cop in Banbury Police Force" is defamatory to every officer working for that force, as they will all be suspected of being the subject of the article, thus damaging their reputation.
Libel Defences
Journalists defame people fairly frequently just by reporting every day events, although many types of libel are safe because there are strong defences available.
- Justification: If the statement can be proven to be true, the action is justified.
- Fair Comment: Meaning "honest opinion". The journalist can publish hurtful things, as long as it is clear that it is comment, not fact.
Journalists must constantly think about what is fact and what is comment.
Privilege
Privilege is a special protection against an action for defamation given to judges, lawyers, witnesses in court and MPs. They have "absolute privilege" which means they can say whatever they like without danger of prosecution.
The following is taken from top lawyer David Price's website:
"The most common form of qualified privilege is where the defendant has a legal, moral or social duty or interest in making the publication and the recipients have a corresponding duty or interest in reading or hearing them. More recently the courts have expanded the concepts of duty and interest to protect the media when they publish material on a matter of public interest which they reasonably believe to be true, but turns out to be false.
The defences of fair comment and qualified privilege can be defeated if the claimant can prove malice on the part of the publisher. Malice will be constituted if the publisher knew the words were false or was reckless as to their truth or falsity"
Moral of the Story: Don't tell lies! Always verify facts before publishing them or you WILL be sued!
Long Awaited Blog Update
Unfortunately I had no internet connection last week and so was unable to update my blog online. However I did prepare it in a Word document, which I shall paste below:
After a week on the course, I have begun to ask questions as to what exactly makes up the Journalism course. Media and Journalism fit together fairly well, as they work within the same industry. But Media Law surely should only be relevant to those journalists whom report on court cases. However, I have learnt in the introduction to Media Law that all Journalists must have a basic knowledge of law, as it can be very easy for a journalist to commit contempt of court. Something as simple as taking a mobile phone into a court case can land you a maximum 30 year prison sentence.
Also, Journalism History, and Philosophy. These also interlink in some ways, as it is important to know how the industry started and important events which have lead up to this present day. I found it more perplexing however, to figure out exactly why we have lectures on Philosophy, as there is no obvious connection to me. I found the answer to this through a conversation with another member of the course: Andrew Giddings, who explained it to me like so: “Philosophy isn’t about finding the answers, it’s about asking the questions, which is just what Journalists do.”
Back to Law: For a guilty verdict to be given, the offence must be proven in court “beyond reasonable doubt”. It is up to the prosecution to prove someone of being guilty, rather than the accused having to prove that they are innocent. Not all people who are taking into the police station for questioning have been arrested, however some people whom voluntarily attend may be detained or arrested depending on their responses to police interrogation. Journalists need to check whether the suspect has been arrested or is voluntarily helping with the investigation. If a suspect is under arrest, the case automatically becomes active under the Contempt of Court Act 1981, which affects what can be published about it.
By law, people who have been detained for further questioning can only be held for 24 hours. If no charge is given after this time the person must be released. An extra 12 hours can be authorised by higher ranked officers for indictable offences. After this time, if the police want to hold a person for longer, they must apply to the courts for permission. Reporters cannot attend hearing applications for further detention.
The Terrorism Act 2006 allows those suspected of terrorism offences to be held for up to 28 days.
A government department called the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are responsible for most prosecutions. The CPS decides the charge in all major cases which involve police investigations. The charge is an accusatory statement giving details of the crime committed I.e. rape, murder.
Police Bail is granted when a suspect is not charged, but police want more time to continue investigations.
Once a person has been charged all questioning must stop and they must be brought before a magistrates court the following day. The decision to prosecute can be made quickly or can take weeks or months if more evidence is needed. The next stage in the case is for the prosecution to decide the charge, or for them to lay down the information before a magistrate, who will then issue a summons, regardless of any evidence.
A summons is a formal document, which requires (or summons) the receiver to attend court on a specified date to respond to the allegations. Therefore, this is another way of starting a prosecution. In court, the summons becomes the charge.
If evidence is presented to a magistrate which proves a person guilty of an indictable offence or other offence punishable by imprisonment then an arrest warrant may be issued. This document gives any police officer the power to arrest this person anywhere in the UK for them to be brought to the magistrates court. This is how prosecution usually begins for suspects who are “on the run”.
If a media organisation discovers that someone is under investigation, they must not identify the person, as they could then be sued for libel if the investigation does not lead to criminal prosecution. Publishing details about a person under investigation may create the impression that they are guilty, which is defamatory. The name of a person under investigation may only be published if the CPS or local council officially release the details for publication.
In some instances, the media are willing to run the risk of libel, if the person is unlikely to take legal action against them. For examples, some celebrities would not sue for libel as they don’t want to alienate the media.
Also, if the media fail to report or charge accurately (I.e. reporting burglary instead of theft) then it can be successfully sued for libel.
The police follow guidelines which state that people under investigation should not be named but may be described, as long as the description does not make them identifiable.
Some crimes stories come with ethical considerations. For example, victims of rape or other sexual offences may not want to be identified.
There are 3 main categories of criminal offence:
Indictable (e.g. murder). These are punishable by a minimum of 5 years imprisonment, and can only be dealt with by Crown court, as the judges have more power.
Either-way offences can be dealt with by magistrates court or at Crown court, depending on magistrates decision and defendants choice. An example of an either way offence is burglary. These may also be referred to as indictable.
Summary offences are minor offences which are fairly straightforward to deal with and so are generally dealt with in magistrates court. Suspects of summary offences do not have the right of Crown court trial.
There are 2 elements to most crimes:
An act which is potentially criminal (actus reus) and
A guilty mind (menz rea), which means the crime was commited with guilty intent, for example, pre-planned.
For some offences, prosecutors do not need to prove guilty intent. These are said to be of “strict liability” and are offences which may put society at risk. For example, a speeding motorist may not have realised how fast he was going, and so had no guilty intent, but will be prosecuted for a strict liability offence.
The majority of court cases are dealt with by magistrates.
There are 2 types of magistrate:
Lay judges, which are mostly part-time volunteers, and
district judges-who are professional, paid judges appointed after at least 7 years as a solicitor or barrister.
However, magistrates have limited powers to sentence in the event of a conviction, and so all indictable offences are referred to Crown court. Magistrates can also refuse to try an either-way charge, or if the defendant chooses trial by jury, then the case will be considered in a committal hearing, and if there is sufficient evidence, the case will be referred to Crown court. If a defendant admits committing an either-way offence, magistrates may sentence him/her or may commit them to Crown court for a higher sentencing. If the case is referred to Crown court, the defendant may be granted bail, or may have to stay in police custody. Reporting restrictions apply to preliminary hearings in the magistrates court if the case has potential for a jury trial. Most cases in the magistrates court can be reported fully, however there are restrictions on what can be reported about a Crown court case, which cease to operate when the trial has finished.
In Crown court, the jury may reach a verdict unanimously, or by a majority vote (10-1). Reporters should not report that an acquittal was by a majority decision.
After a week on the course, I have begun to ask questions as to what exactly makes up the Journalism course. Media and Journalism fit together fairly well, as they work within the same industry. But Media Law surely should only be relevant to those journalists whom report on court cases. However, I have learnt in the introduction to Media Law that all Journalists must have a basic knowledge of law, as it can be very easy for a journalist to commit contempt of court. Something as simple as taking a mobile phone into a court case can land you a maximum 30 year prison sentence.
Also, Journalism History, and Philosophy. These also interlink in some ways, as it is important to know how the industry started and important events which have lead up to this present day. I found it more perplexing however, to figure out exactly why we have lectures on Philosophy, as there is no obvious connection to me. I found the answer to this through a conversation with another member of the course: Andrew Giddings, who explained it to me like so: “Philosophy isn’t about finding the answers, it’s about asking the questions, which is just what Journalists do.”
Back to Law: For a guilty verdict to be given, the offence must be proven in court “beyond reasonable doubt”. It is up to the prosecution to prove someone of being guilty, rather than the accused having to prove that they are innocent. Not all people who are taking into the police station for questioning have been arrested, however some people whom voluntarily attend may be detained or arrested depending on their responses to police interrogation. Journalists need to check whether the suspect has been arrested or is voluntarily helping with the investigation. If a suspect is under arrest, the case automatically becomes active under the Contempt of Court Act 1981, which affects what can be published about it.
By law, people who have been detained for further questioning can only be held for 24 hours. If no charge is given after this time the person must be released. An extra 12 hours can be authorised by higher ranked officers for indictable offences. After this time, if the police want to hold a person for longer, they must apply to the courts for permission. Reporters cannot attend hearing applications for further detention.
The Terrorism Act 2006 allows those suspected of terrorism offences to be held for up to 28 days.
A government department called the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are responsible for most prosecutions. The CPS decides the charge in all major cases which involve police investigations. The charge is an accusatory statement giving details of the crime committed I.e. rape, murder.
Police Bail is granted when a suspect is not charged, but police want more time to continue investigations.
Once a person has been charged all questioning must stop and they must be brought before a magistrates court the following day. The decision to prosecute can be made quickly or can take weeks or months if more evidence is needed. The next stage in the case is for the prosecution to decide the charge, or for them to lay down the information before a magistrate, who will then issue a summons, regardless of any evidence.
A summons is a formal document, which requires (or summons) the receiver to attend court on a specified date to respond to the allegations. Therefore, this is another way of starting a prosecution. In court, the summons becomes the charge.
If evidence is presented to a magistrate which proves a person guilty of an indictable offence or other offence punishable by imprisonment then an arrest warrant may be issued. This document gives any police officer the power to arrest this person anywhere in the UK for them to be brought to the magistrates court. This is how prosecution usually begins for suspects who are “on the run”.
If a media organisation discovers that someone is under investigation, they must not identify the person, as they could then be sued for libel if the investigation does not lead to criminal prosecution. Publishing details about a person under investigation may create the impression that they are guilty, which is defamatory. The name of a person under investigation may only be published if the CPS or local council officially release the details for publication.
In some instances, the media are willing to run the risk of libel, if the person is unlikely to take legal action against them. For examples, some celebrities would not sue for libel as they don’t want to alienate the media.
Also, if the media fail to report or charge accurately (I.e. reporting burglary instead of theft) then it can be successfully sued for libel.
The police follow guidelines which state that people under investigation should not be named but may be described, as long as the description does not make them identifiable.
Some crimes stories come with ethical considerations. For example, victims of rape or other sexual offences may not want to be identified.
There are 3 main categories of criminal offence:
Indictable (e.g. murder). These are punishable by a minimum of 5 years imprisonment, and can only be dealt with by Crown court, as the judges have more power.
Either-way offences can be dealt with by magistrates court or at Crown court, depending on magistrates decision and defendants choice. An example of an either way offence is burglary. These may also be referred to as indictable.
Summary offences are minor offences which are fairly straightforward to deal with and so are generally dealt with in magistrates court. Suspects of summary offences do not have the right of Crown court trial.
There are 2 elements to most crimes:
An act which is potentially criminal (actus reus) and
A guilty mind (menz rea), which means the crime was commited with guilty intent, for example, pre-planned.
For some offences, prosecutors do not need to prove guilty intent. These are said to be of “strict liability” and are offences which may put society at risk. For example, a speeding motorist may not have realised how fast he was going, and so had no guilty intent, but will be prosecuted for a strict liability offence.
The majority of court cases are dealt with by magistrates.
There are 2 types of magistrate:
Lay judges, which are mostly part-time volunteers, and
district judges-who are professional, paid judges appointed after at least 7 years as a solicitor or barrister.
However, magistrates have limited powers to sentence in the event of a conviction, and so all indictable offences are referred to Crown court. Magistrates can also refuse to try an either-way charge, or if the defendant chooses trial by jury, then the case will be considered in a committal hearing, and if there is sufficient evidence, the case will be referred to Crown court. If a defendant admits committing an either-way offence, magistrates may sentence him/her or may commit them to Crown court for a higher sentencing. If the case is referred to Crown court, the defendant may be granted bail, or may have to stay in police custody. Reporting restrictions apply to preliminary hearings in the magistrates court if the case has potential for a jury trial. Most cases in the magistrates court can be reported fully, however there are restrictions on what can be reported about a Crown court case, which cease to operate when the trial has finished.
In Crown court, the jury may reach a verdict unanimously, or by a majority vote (10-1). Reporters should not report that an acquittal was by a majority decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)