week 16 - How technology disrupted the truth

Social media has swallowed the news – threatening the funding of public-interest reporting and ushering in an era when everyone has their own facts. But the consequences go far beyond journalism - by Katharine Viner. 

“The British people have voted to leave the European Union and their will must be respected,” Cameron declared. “It was not a decision that was taken lightly, not least because so many things were said by so many different organisations about the significance of this decision. So there can be no doubt about the result.”

But what soon became clear was that almost everything was still in doubt. At the end of a campaign that dominated the news for months, it was suddenly obvious that the winning side had no plan for how or when the UK would leave the EU – while the deceptive claims that carried the leave campaign to victory suddenly crumbled. 

At 6.31am on Friday 24 June, just over an hour after the result of the EU referendum had become clear, Ukip leader Nigel Farage conceded that a post-Brexit UK would not in fact have £350m a week spare to spend on the NHS – a key claim of Brexiteers that was even emblazoned on the Vote Leave campaign bus. A few hours later, the Tory MEP Daniel Hannan stated that immigration was not likely to be reduced – another key claim.

It was hardly the first time that politicians had failed to deliver what they promised, but it might have been the first time they admitted on the morning after victory that the promises had been false all along. This was the first major vote in the era of post-truth politics: the listless remain campaign attempted to fight fantasy with facts, but quickly found that the currency of fact had been badly debased.

The remain side’s worrying facts and worried experts were dismissed as “Project Fear” – and quickly neutralised by opposing “facts”: if 99 experts said the economy would crash and one disagreed, the BBC told us that each side had a different view of the situation. (This is a disastrous mistake that ends up obscuring truth, and echoes how some report climate change.)

week 16 - BBC sets up team to debunk fake news

Permanent Reality Check team will target false stories or facts being shared on social media.

The BBC is to assemble a team to fact check and debunk deliberately misleading and false stories masquerading as real news.

Amid growing concern among politicians and news organisations about the impact of false information online, news chief James Harding told staff on Thursday that the BBC would be “weighing in on the battle over lies, distortions and exaggerations”.

The plans will see the corporation’s Reality Check series become permanent, backed by a dedicated team targeting false stories or facts being shared widely on social media.

“The BBC can’t edit the internet, but we won’t stand aside either,” Harding said. “We will fact check the most popular outliers on Facebook, Instagram and other social media.

False information around big events such as the UK’s referendum on leaving the EU and the US election has been especially rife, with numerous instances of completely fabricated stories, many of which are created with the sole aim of generating advertising revenue from people viewing the stories.Facebook has been singled out as the platform that has enabled false stories to spread most widely.

week 15 - Newsquest chief finally realises shock-horror doesn't sell regional papers

What do people want of their local news provider? News? If so, what kind of news? Sport? For sure. Comment? Maybe. Entertainment? Certainly. Information? Of course. Wedding pictures? Baby pictures?

In days of yore, when there was only newsprint, editors tended to guess what their audiences wanted. Although high circulations implied that intuition worked, how could editors ever be sure?

Now, with online readers far outnumbering print readers, the clicks are altogether more revealing, providing a reliable source of knowledge about readers’ desires.

Look around at the digital news initiatives that are making the weather in 2017. The Washington Post (prime competitor to the Times) is launching the Lily – a quite separate site of Post news re-edited for female millennial consumption, intentionally young, not old. The founders of Politico have just launched Axios, a site that gives you the news at pace (and added depth as required). And, of course, there’s the massive Mail Online, which is nothing like the Mail on a newsstand. In short, you need an angle, a particular selling point: you don’t need the full legacy treatment.

A new report from the Reuters Institute on media upheavals in 2017 predicts more print papers will follow the Independent and go online only.

Media advertising needs “new skills, talents, technologies and substantial fresh investment”, according to Mark Thompson, once BBC director general, now New York Times boss: a man to bring two worlds together. But as Thompson charts this future with its “unified approach” in his essay for Last Words, a comprehensive series of such examinations from Abramis published last week, does he ever think that equally different imperatives apply for the stuff that runs between the ads? The stuff we call news.

week 15 - You don’t have to act like a newspaper on the net Peter Preston

In some ways the New York Times is the BBC of print journalism: dominant, revered, imperious, sometimes bathed in irritating self-congratulation. 

But it is also, inevitably, an obsessively observed leader in the hideously difficult business of moving from newsprint to digital screen. If the Times can make it, perhaps others can. If the Times fails, then newspaper companies everywhere can start to despair.Which makes its latest health check (from an officially appointed team of its own journalists) seem very important. Three years ago, a first “innovation” team report plumped for digital integration and chose subscriptions – paywalls rather than advertising free-for-alls – as the chosen survival route. Now “Our Path Forward” marches ambitiously down that road.

But such success isn’t enough, apparently. Transitions never go fast or far enough – unless of course they go too far, too fast. The danger down this trail is a relentlessly balanced tour of Cake-and-Eat-It territory. “We need to reduce the dominant role that the print newspaper still plays in our organisation and rhythms, while making the print paper even better.”

Brothers and sisters, that’s pure self-delusion. Print is a meal prepared to a set deadline, emerging from ovens at a magic moment. Digital is a constantly changing 24-hour buffet. Make print assemble its menu from that buffet and, inevitably, there’s a weakening of focus. Not fatal perhaps, but not offering something “even better”.

And, indeed, the most interesting chunks of Times future shock come at the interstices where standard print wisdom needs radical rethinking. “Our largely print-centric strategy, while highly successful, has kept us from building a sufficiently successful digital presence and attracting new audiences for our features content …

week 14 - Panel debate on what can, or should, be done about fake news

Frontline Club hosts discussion about the phenomenon that has exposed sharp differences between mainstream media and social media.

The terms “post-truth”, “fake news” and “misinformation” have opened a heated debate about the problematic relationship between mainstream news organisations and social media platforms, such as Twitter and Facebook.

Journalists working for traditional media outlets now view it as part of their task to debunk the erroneous reports which circulate online.

They are responding in part to demands from readers who are calling for new standards of accuracy and impartiality.But have they the resources to accomplish the task? Have cuts within the industry contributed to the arrival of the “fake news” phenomenon? And will those cuts make it more difficult to devote the necessary time to expose the falsehoods?

 In short, how can journalism maintain its integrity at a time when unverified information circulates on social media under the guise of fact?

Tait is the technology and digital culture writer at the New Statesman with a particular interest in cyber-psychology and the way social media has revolutionised our world. Murgia is European technology correspondent for the Financial Times.

Identities: Post-colonial theory & blog tasks

• List FIVE films, FIVE TV programmes and FIVE online-only productions that are discussed in the article.

Films:

Kidulthood (2006), 

Adulthood (2008)

Anuvahood (2011)

Attack The Block (2011)

Ill Manors (2012)

TV programmes:
55 Degrees North (2004)
Luther (2010)
Line of Duty (2012).
Top Boy
Goodness Gracious Me (1998)

FIVE online-only productions:
Brothers With No Game
Venus Vs Mars 
The Ryan Sisters
All About the McKenzies 
Meet the Adebanjos 
To what extent can we apply Alvarado's and Fanon's theories to these films? Do they reinforce or subvert typical black stereotypes in British film and TV? Refer to specific scenes and events in the clips in answering this question and aim for at least 350 words.

One of Destiny Ekaragha's films 'Gone Too Far' link to Alvarado's theory and fits into the category of humorous and exotic. It fits into these two categories as the film is quite comical, whilst at the same time the film shows the traditional ways and the culture of the characters. For example, the brother of Yemi, showed evidently how the culture is presented. Furthermore, most of the film was comical, especially at the beginning when Yemi's brother first arrived there were a lot of humorous scenes when they were walking around etc. Another film that links into Alvardo's theory is 'Tight Jeans'. This film also links into the category of humorous and exotic, as the film once again, is comical and it shows the life of living in an urban environment. In terms of Fanon's theories, it would link into decivilized youths. 

  

Identities and the Media: Reading the riots

 1. How did the language and selection of images in the coverage create a particular representation of young people? 

The way the language was phrased in this article present the youth as the main reason as to why the riots were taking place. 

Phrases such as: ‘childish destructiveness’ ‘feral youth’, the ‘hoodies’ and ‘yobs’ were used to describe young people. Additionally, the pictures used were all of young people in hoodies rioting. 

  2. Why does David Buckingham mention Owen Jones and his work Chavs: the demonisation of the working class?

3. What is the typical representation of young people – and teenage boys in particular? What did the 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey find?

The typical representation of young people was of that they were mainly describes as the main ones taking part in the riots and creating chaos. Moreover, Women in Journalism analysed 7,000+ stories involving teenage boys published online, 72% that were negative stories. 

The 2005 IPSOS/MORI survey found that 40% of newspaper articles that had young people involved focused on violence, crime or anti-social behaviour. 

4. How can Stanley Cohen’s work on Moral Panic be linked to the coverage of the riots?

Stan Cohen implies in his definition of a moral panic, there is a struggle for ‘ownership’

of the issue. Different people – politicians, community leaders, media commentators,

‘experts’ – offer different accounts of what is happening; although they often receive most attention if they can come up with simple explanations, and propose simple solutions. Yet how they do this often reflects their own social or political interests: the issue becomes an opportunity for them to make broader points, and to promote their own views. Stanley Cohen's work on moral panics can be linked to the coverage of the riots, as people such as the older generation who had no involvement in the riots would be scared/worried as all they saw were the destruction of buildings and violence. 

5. What elements of the media and popular culture were blamed for the riots?

On all sides of the media debate, there was a rush to instant judgment – or at least instant opinion. Advocates of participatory media would see this as indicative of healthy public dialogue.

6.How was social media blamed for the riots? What was interesting about the discussion of social media when compared to the Arab Spring in 2011?
Social media is one main aspect as to why the riots occurred. This was evident when there was a group of thugs who used the social platform 'Twitter' to instigate the riot that occurred in Tottenham. 

7.The riots generated a huge amount of comment and opinion - both in mainstream and social media. How can the two-step flow theory be linked to the coverage of the riots?
The two-step flow model can be linked to the coverage of the riots, as highlighting certain events that take place during riots can influence certain young people into actually taking part in riots themselves. This can be due to the fact that the media mainly based the blame of the riots on the youth. 

8. Alternatively, how might media scholars like Henry Jenkins view the 'tsunami' of blogs, forums and social media comments? Do you agree that this shows the democratisation of the media?

Henry Jenkins in fact saw these blogs and forums as a positive thing, as he believes that through the internet and technology people are allowed to express their opinions through these platforms and so. I believe that it does show show democratisation of the media, however at the same time the media hold on to a lot of power in order for them to filter out what is suitable or not. 


9. What were the right-wing responses to the causes of the riots?

The right-wing responses to the causes of the riots were mainly aimed towards the youth. News institutions such as The Daily Mail, demonized the youth by using animalistic imagery to describe the way the youth behaved during the riots. 

10. What were the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots?
However, the left-wing responses to the causes of the riots are that they aren't blaming the youth, but in fact that the reason as to why the youth did take part in the riots, was due to the lack of services for the youth. 

11. What are your OWN views on the main causes of the riots?

I do believe that the youth did play a role into the riots. However I don't think the main cause was due to them, I believe that the riots occurred due to the death of Mark Duggan. Furthermore, the internet also played a significant role into why the riots developed and got out of hand. But in my opinion, I do think they were sparked by the killing of Mark Duggan.

12. How can capitalism be blamed for the riots? What media theory (from our new/digital media unit) can this be linked to?

Capitalism can be blamed for the riots due to the higher class may have instigated the youth to behave immorally. One theory that can be linked to this is hegemony as elite people are the ones that take control and power, therefore, pushing the youth to react in a way for equality.

13.Were people involved in the riots given a voice in the media to explain their participation?

No,  people who were involved in the riots were not given a voice in the media to explain their participation in the riots. However, other people spoke for them, such as historians, journalists. This therefore, was not a honest or true explanation given to the audience resulting in the people who did take part being miss judged.  

14. In the Guardian website's investigation into the causes of the riots, they did interview rioters themselves. Read this Guardian article from their Reading the Riots academic research project - what causes are outlined by those involved in the disturbances?

Some causes outlined by those involved in the disturbances were; the high number of people who were unemployed, gang related issues, political issues and social media - mainly BBM. 

15. What is your own opinion on the riots? Do you have sympathy with those involved or do you believe strong prison sentences are the right approach to prevent such events happening in future? 
In my opinion, I believe that the riots did get extremely out of hand. I also do sympathise with the minority who rioted for a valid reason. However, I don't sympathise with the ones who rioted for no reason other than for having fun. Additionally, I don't believe that prison sentences were the right approach to prevent events happening in the future. The riots mainly occurred due to the shooting of Mark Duggan and some people rioted for valid reasons, such as unemployment alongside other matters. Therefore, I believe these matters should've been discussed with the people who lived withing the community, instead of putting them into jail.