Codes of Practice

This is not actual law, but a journalistic code.  It’s more ETHICAL, reassuring the public.  It builds a bond between journalists and their audience.

Three main codes:

PCC (Press Complaints Commission) – newspapers and magazines

Ofcom – broadcasters

BBC – for BBC staff and license payers

Purpose...

The law is specific and limited in action

It also offers a benchmark for behaviour amongst journalists

Key Areas

Ethical behaviour – how far is far enough

Fair Treatment – giving a respect for privacy

There is a requirement for accuracy and impartiality

Vulnerable groups are protected in codes

PCC

This is SELF REGULATING.  It is often considered to have more relaxed rules because of it.

In the editors code of practice (found on pcc.org.uk), asterisks highlight areas which may not be held, if there is an overriding public interest.  Due to this suiting newspapers, there is a lot of cynicism amongst the public over the actual codes effectiveness.

Ofcom

This is much more powerful that the PCC.  They hold statutory powers which can result in much more trouble – for example large fines.

In the past, in response to the ITV competitions scandal, Ofcom fined ITV £5.6m.

                                                                     

They can give directions for a programme not to be repeated, and for the corrections to be broadcast.  Fines of up to 5% of revenue can be imposed or they can even revoke broadcast licenses.  In July 2010, Ofcom served the owners of four adult channels (Tease Me, Tease Me TV, Tease Me 2, Tease Me 3), Bang Channels Limited and Bang Media Limited with a fine of £157,250 for broadcasting sexually explicit material before the 9pm watershed.  Later in November of the same year, the channels had their licenses revoked and were taken off air.

Broadcaster are obliged to be impartial in broadcasting, whereas newspapers appear to get away with more.  Impartiality varies in different circumstances.

BBC

These are the BBC editorial guidelines, and in practice are a working document/reference for journalists. 

They can be found at:

bbc.co.uk/guidelines/editorialguidelines

One Minute Straussy?

Seriously, I’ve just sat down to treat myself – live coverage of the Ashes for an hour or so with a mug of mulled wine.  Fantastic, you may say.  Well, I would have agreed until I couldn’t believe my eyes!  Andrew Strauss out for a duck, in the first minute!  It can’t be any longer, because they’ve only just started the first over.

I sigh to myself.  I blame the commentators and the coverage they’ve just been giving in the last hour.  They’ve been saying that it looks like Australia may be the underdogs coming into the series, and of course this gives a glimmer of hope to every Englishman’s (and woman’s) heart.  Of course not! We are rather stupid Pommies to think those warm beer drinkers would not play for The Ashes when at home.

I continue to watch England batting.  I’m starting to feel rather jealous; not only is it sunny – with beautifully formed (definitely not rain) clouds in a blue sky, but it’s obviously a pleasant temperature.

My temperament starts to goes downhill.  Not enough alcohol to make myself merry and a loss of a wicket so early on; it’s very clear that England need to get it together in this first test match game.  I just nearly had a heart attack, as I write this blog, the Aussies appeal "hows thaaaaaat!". Please no, twenty minutes and two wickets gone?  I’m not sure I could cope!  Thankfully 'NOT OUT' pops up on the screen.

I am rather excited about the whole thing.  Apart from the matches being broadcast live from Brisbane at Midnight (in the UK) to 7am , I have never seen The Ashes live for a long time.  With Sky taking over the rights to broadcast, I’m left to remember the good old days of BBC – although I’m sure England hardly won in the days of Michael Atherton (who left me at the time, aged 10, with a bit of a crush; and to this day I have no idea why). 

I don’t mind staying up a bit later to enjoy the match, it’s therapeutic and gentle, not a bad idea to relax before bed.  Unfortunately I'm anticipating that I'll be waking up to bad news!

3 Long Hours

A rather testing, but amusing assignment is before me.  I must construct a presentation on the News Agenda of the Southern Daily Echo and BBC Radio Solent.

Currently listening to BBC Solent, waiting for news bulletins (which are on the hour), I am not quite captured by content or music.  I think I’ve been transported back to the Seventies – although this is then broken up by the drone of James Blunt.  It’s obvious I am not in their target audience and I’m rather amused by their discussion of ‘reality’ programmes on TV.  Generally the consensus for listeners phoning in is that they are a waste of time and money.  An interview with the presenter’s daughter also brought a smile to my face; it’s clear the presenter is quite ‘aware’ of the reality shows available, although he tries to sit on the fence for those listeners who probably have no idea about them.

I must admit, although the station is not my cup of tea – it’s factually interesting, as well as intellectually stimulating.  Apart from the presenter’s slight annoying voice, their interviewing skills are very good, and it must appeal to those listeners.  It’s an intelligent radio station.

On the other hand, the Southern Daily Echo is also not ‘floating my boat’.  All that I can describe this to be is ‘garish’. I’m not too keen on the tabloid nature of the newspaper, and the news agenda of the paper is quite random.  I’m not too sure I would organise the stories in that way.  However, it is obviously a local paper, and this is why it is bought.  It’s packed full of what could be considered not very important ‘news’, but then if you live in the Hampshire area, it’s much more relevant.

Maybe it’s me that has the problem – as I’m not really concerned over the area.  As a ‘migrant’ from Surrey, I’m not too bothered about Southampton news, I’d rather read about London and reports from the commuter belt.  I’m also rather prejudiced about the inhabitants of the surrounding areas of Southampton, which lessens my interest even more. I should probably accept I no longer live in that area.  Of course, if I were a paid journalist employed to find out about Fareham’s stray dog service, I’d be 110% concerned!

Tiger Summit in St Petersburg

Russian Prime Minister, Vladmir Putin, is hosting an international tiger summit in St Petersburg, starting today. 

The summit comes as concerns increase about declining tiger numbers.  Held during the Chinese year of the Tiger, there are aims to double the amount of wild tigers by 2022, the next year of the Tiger.  Putin, along with president of the World Bank, Robert Zoellick, hope to secure the support of £220m for tiger conservation.

According to the WWF, tiger numbers have decreased by 97%; falling rapidly in the last few years to just 3,200, with several subspecies dying out.  This is due to loss of habitat from often illegal deforestation as well as poaching for body parts. Bones and other body parts are still considered important for medicinal purposes, especially in China and therefore trade is difficult to stop.

Efforts will be made to increase conservation areas within the Asian countries where tigers are found.  Putin has pledged the support of Russia in a bid to crack down on poaching, assisting China to stop the sale of tiger parts.

A Catholic Change

Pope Benedict XVI has recognized the possible use of condoms in a bid to stop infection.

The latest comments come as a new book is due to be published next week.  Light of The World - The Pope, The Church and the Signs of the Times is based on the interview with German Catholic journalist, Peter Seewald.  In the interview, The Pope has said that condoms may be used in certain situations.

Pope Benedict XVI stated of the Church's stance: "She of course does not regard it [using condoms] as a real or moral solution, but, in this or that case, there can be nonetheless, in the intention of reducing the risk of infection, a first step in a movement toward a different way, a more human way, of living sexuality."

The remarks do not encourage the use of condoms as the answer to HIV and Aids, but he has said their use may be justified to prevent spread.  In a trip to Cameroon last year, the Pope was criticised for his comments that the use of condoms only made the spread of HIV/Aids worse.  

Campaigners have welcomed the news, saying that it is a positive step in thinking.  UNAIDS, the United Nations programme on HIV/Aids, in particular is pleased about the new stance.  UNAIDS Executive Director, Michel Sidibe said: "This move recognises that responsible sexual behaviour and the use of condoms have important roles in HIV prevention."

Although the move is seen as a monumental change in doctrine, the Catholic Church has not changed their view on contraception. According to the Catholic Voices group, this take by the Pope about condoms is not new with Catholic moral theologians.  Austen Ivereign, coordinator of the group, said that because the Pope was suggesting that condoms be used not for contraception, but to stop the transmission of HIV/Aids; Catholic moral theologians would say that it was on a “different moral order” and therefore not compromising the Catholic belief.

X Factor - A Way To Stop Benefit Fraud

Not that I consider this particularly newsworthy as an 'X Factor report', I have still found the following story amusing!  Who would have thought that reality shows could be helping the coalition crack down on benefit claimants...

It has been revealed that X Factor finalist Wagner Fiuza-Carrilho, 54, has been claiming incapacity benefit since injuring his shoulder last year.  He has had two operations on the shoulder, the second in January of this year.

As part of the X Factor, Wagner attends the gym, and gives rather energetic performances on the live shows - which has called into question his acceptance of these benefits.  The Department of Work and Pensions appeared quite open minded when speaking to The Mailonline, saying: 'People's conditions change all the time. When new information comes to light, we reassess their fitness for work.'  I'm sure they will.

This, however, wouldn't be the first case where a reality show has exposed benefit claims.  In 2009, Britain's Got Talent entrant Fred Bower, 74, who received disabilty allowance, wowed the audience when performing a breakdance.  Unfortunately for Fred, it was noticed that his injured leg was obviously not holding him back as much as he had stated.  He had to pay back £3,000.

If David Cameron is looking for a clever way to form an attack on benefit fraudsters, I would suggest he employ Simon Cowell.

Take That!...Super-Injunction

Take That's Howard Donald, is the latest celebrity to have their super-injunction over turned. 

The decision was made at the Court of Appeal by Master of the Rolls Lord Neuberger, Lord Justice Maurice Kay and Lord Justice Sedley. 

Originally, Howard Donald had sought the super-injunction in April against former girlfriend Adakini Ntuli, when it was made apparent that she wanted to sell her story and reveal personal information about their relationship via Max Clifford.  Donald not only wanted her story silenced, but also the fact that he had applied for the injunction (therefore becoming a super-injunction).

Even though the super-injunction was rejected by the Court of Appeal, the injunction remains in place; Miss Ntuli still cannot sell any personal information about Howard Donald.

Media Law - Copyright

Copyright laws apply where some intellect has been used to create something – known as intellectual property.  It is covered by Statute law in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.  This includes any skill, labour or creativity involved. 

It is classed a breach or infringement of copyright if you are ‘making beneficial use’ of someone else’s work without permission.  If you use their work to your advantage, for instance, making a profit at their expense, this is seen as exploitation. 

What is protected and what is not

Protected: everything in the product of original work

Not Protected: undeveloped ideas, slogans and catchphrases.

Journalists are also covered by the copyright law – in fact it has helped journalism flourish.  There is the idea within journalism that if you respect others copyright, then they will respect yours.  The value of product is heightened by the exclusivity, and the respect of copyright ensures this.

The main reason for the media to care about copyright is because it can cost a lot of money.  Like other media law blunders, it usually results in a large compensation and bad reputation. 

Ways Round – ‘Fair Dealing’

Papers ‘lift’ stories from each other, but only up to a point.  This may include quotes, but not the complete story. 

‘Fair dealing’ can cover a journalist, where they lift the point of a story or the quotes.  They must be attributed to the newspaper sourced from, and it must be in the public interest.  The usage must be ‘fair’.

Copyright material can be used if it is for critical or review purposes.  At the same time, broadcast news obituaries of film stars can use famous movie clips for free, but it has to be contemporary; a clip cannot be used weeks later.

IMPORTANT:

Photographs are never covered by fair dealing

In America, Brownmark Films has in the last week filed a suit against “South Park”, Comedy Central and Viacom.  They have claimed that “South Park” has committed a copyright infringement in a parody of the Brownmark video ‘What What (In the Butt)’, in an episode dating back to 2008.  The company has stated that the creators of “South Park” have wilfully, intentionally and purposefully disregarded the rights of Brownmark.

In defence, Comedy Central has said that their previous parodies have been covered by the ‘fair-use’ part of the Copyright Act and that courts recognise this.  They are confident they will be fully protected in the current suit.

Introduction to Journalism Exercise

Types of News Photographs

'Mug Shot'
This photo identifies actor David Tennant in an article about a new drama being made.

 'Action photo'
This sets the scene in Ireland when discussing the Irish financial problems.  The photo obviously has an Irish flag, as well as the public in the background.  In the foreground the man is homeless - showing the lack of money and jobs in the country.

 'Mug Shot'
MP Gerry Adams - there is no confusion about which Gerry Adams the article is about.

 'Action photo'
Shows The Queen laying a wreath for Rememberance Sunday.  The clergy and military figures are shown to be watching the action.

 'Action Shot'
Action shot of veterans marching down Whitehall for Rememberance Sunday.



'Mug Shot'

Posed photograph of Sir David Reynolds.  Avoids confusion of identity.

'Beatles For Sale'

Hallelujah...Hallelujah...

I admit, these lyrics are from a different artist altogether; even so, the words mimic my reaction to the news that finally the Beatles are on iTunes!  Ever since owning my first iPod and iTunes library, I wanted to download Beatles albums.  I was rather confused and frustrated when I couldn’t find them – then realised it was the complexities of record labels that held the music back.

Not completely believing the reports of the Wall Street Journal, I opened my own iTunes account.  The sight that greeted my eyes was fantastic, a huge ‘The Beatles’ sign with all the available albums.  Thirteen studio albums, selling at £10.99, as well as a couple of double albums priced at £17.99; this previously desired back catalogue is now appearing rather expensive at £196.84.

Only £125 for the Beatles box set.  Hmm.  I better start saving.

Engagement Party

I know there will be many who do not care too much about Prince William and his personal affairs, and many who do not care about the royal family altogether.  However, the news of William’s engagement to Kate Middleton should, in my opinion, be celebrated. 

Yes, they exist in a completely different bubble, but it doesn’t mean they’re not human.  Having watched the live news coverage of Princess Diana’s funeral in 1997, it hit home what high expectations Prince William was to inherit. Two young boys, one my own age, and the other only two years older, stood waiting for their mother’s cortege.  They had to then publicly – viewed by millions worldwide, follow it, without any show of emotion.  It was their beloved mother, and yet everyone else was able to cry, whilst all they could do was hang their heads.

It was then passed onto a 15 year old, who had so many of Diana’s looks, to carry on causes which she had supported.  If he was to have any kind of ‘normal’ childhood before this tragic event, it was unlikely he’d get it after it.  Still, he managed to complete his education, whilst remaining a public figure (unlike most celebrities, who propel themselves into the public eye, and then complain of the attention).  He even partook in ‘normal’ activities – taking a gap year before university.  It wasn’t much of a surprise that adjusting to university life was quite hard for Prince William, and I’m sure meeting Kate helped him to carry on his studies when he wanted to give them up.  I hardly think William’s career depended on gaining a degree – it’s generally who you know, and he knows rather influential people.

William has also been well aware of his parent’s unhappy marriage, which often has a negative effect on someone.  However, he managed to find himself a companion that wasn’t of royal or aristocratic kind (although still from a rich family) who obviously made him happy.  Their engagement, after at least 8 years together, shows they haven’t rushed into anything to please anyone but themselves.  I hope they enjoy a happy marriage, because there is no reason they shouldn’t.

The role of the royal family within modern society is debated, often seen as outdated and irrelevant.  I wouldn’t deny I’m not keen on my taxes paying for corgi food, but at the same time, I see the culture and history continued by the monarchy.  So many people from other countries are, dare I say, jealous of our royal family and history, and I feel quite proud.  I don’t think a trip to London would be as special, if you weren’t looking for The Queen’s flag flying at Buckingham Palace, wondering if she was inside having a cuppa.

A Royal Wedding

Prince William is to marry his long-term girlfriend, Kate Middleton, next spring or summer, in London.

The announcement came from Clarence House today, saying the couple, both 28, had become engaged in October during their holiday in Kenya.  The young prince has informed The Queen and other close family members, and has sought the permission of Miss Middleton's father.  The Prince of Wales is said to be 'delighted' at the engagement. 

Prime Minister David Cameron said: “I am delighted to hear this wonderful news. I am sure the whole country will join Samantha and me in wishing them great joy in their life together.”

Prince William met Kate Middleton whilst studying at St Andrews in 2001.  They were originally studying art history together, but William later changed to geography.  Miss Middleton is said to have helped William continue his degree when he encountered problems in adjusting to university life. 

Their relationship was made public in 2005, when photographers captured the pair kissing on a skiing holiday.  Following a brief split in 2007, the pair have been together since.  Miss Middleton has no royal or aristocratic family connections, and her family are self-made millionaires.

After the wedding, the couple will live in north Wales, where William is currently serving with the RAF.

No Longer a Roaring Tiger

The Irish Republic has denied that it needs to be bailed out by the EU, although they admit to having talks with “international colleagues”.

The government has said that it doesn’t want help from Brussels, and that it has enough money to last until next summer.  However, creditors see Ireland as having a bad credit rating and are trying to force them towards the handout.  Other countries too are considering how the Euro may be affected if Ireland doesn’t accept the bail-out.  If they accept the assistance, it will give a sense of certainty, easing the worries of some EU officials.  Portugal has urged Ireland to think of the EU’s interests as well as their own.

At the same time, it can be suggested that the pride of Ireland will be tainted if they take money from the International Monetary Fund.  It could also bring into question the independence of Ireland financially. Having enjoyed a booming economy (named the Celtic Tiger) based on investment, low interest rates and easy lending; Ireland, once one of the poorest EU countries, became one of the richest.  Now facing the great deficit as a result of the boom/bust, the country doesn't want to go backwards and want to build their own recovery, without looking elsewhere for assistance.

The Irish government will introduce greater cuts by 2014, with many jobs being lost and higher taxes; many fear it will deepen the recession instead of help resolve it. There need to be cuts, but the problem is that the Irish people have to pay for the mistakes of those in higher positions.    

If a bail-out is requested by Dublin, the Irish people are not the only ones who will then suffer.  It is reported that the Irish Republic will need £70bn, and for Britain’s tax payers it would cost at least £7bn.  However, if the Irish are not helped, it could lead to further problems – Portugal and Spain may follow in their requests for help, straining EU finances.

Introduction to Media - Feature Exercise

Identifying types of features from ‘Surrey Life’.

Profile: ‘Shane Filan’- Shane Filan p56, ‘The Max Factor’ – Max Clifford p74, ‘Curioser and curioser...’ – local Lewis Carroll highlights p41

Response: competition p86, ‘Your views’ – letters p11, ‘Q&A Meet the Estate Agent’ – tips on lettings p13, ‘At Home in Surrey’ – property advice p12, ‘Strawberry fields forever’ – recipe p134

Confessional interviews: ‘Living the dream’ – moving out of London p78, ‘My Surrey Weekend’ – what a weekend looks like for Mandy Morrow p146

Reviews: ‘Top Summer Pubs’ – Pub review p67

Media Law - Freedom of Information

Freedom of Information Act 2000

Statue – requires all public funded bodies (not private)

-          Must publish documentation on demand

-          Must publish the schedule of information they have

-          Must give in a reasonable time (approx within 20 days to reply to the initial request)

National security matter won’t be digressed, neither will military.

The Business of Freedom

A key figure, Matt Davis has made FOI his business.  He runs a news agency DataNews, which relies alone on FOI researches.

In a press conference attended by the Press Gazette in February 2009, Davis suggested that the BBC would suffer cuts due to their spending being released.   When the accommodation for the world cup in Germany was made public - £1.6m, a small fortune; or the Christmas party in 2007, at £50 a head (with a total bill of £250,000), it’s more than obvious that someone was going to be unhappy that their license fee was spent in that way.  Davis credits the FOI Act for lowering the Christmas party to £25 a head the following year.

It wouldn’t be a surprise if the BBC tried to fight FOI and initially it seems they did, refusing requests on the exemption of ‘journalistic, artistic or literature’ reasons.  However, they finally embraced the idea, setting up a specific team to deal with the questions.

FOI Requests

-          Has to be simple

-          Write to the council, to the information officer of whatever body you wish to contact

Although the law has meant much wider access to information, there can be delays in requests.  The government can refuse or delay requests if it is best for them.  Be sure to simplify the request of information, so it can’t be deemed too expensive to find out the information.  It can also take time to be given the information you’re trying to find out, so planning ahead is best.  Even though FOI does reap its rewards, Jeremy Hayes suggests that costs and time limits could lower the amount of research by newsrooms.   

Does the public really need to know?

I must be honest; I don’t like being kept out of the loop.  If something is worth knowing, I want to know it and I appreciate that FOI has brought things to light that the public should know.  For instance, I would want to know the MP expenses scandal.  If an MP claims for a second house that’s 100 miles from their constituency or claims for lightbulb replacement, it’s in the public interest that these ones should not go unnoticed.  As a result of publicising the expenses (through the original FOI requests made in 2005 by The Sunday Telegraph), MPs will have to closely watch their claims, knowing they cannot claim for mole control; which in turn tightens government spending.

Even so, there are SOME things I don’t particularly want to know.  I believe the Blue Peter Garden - the untouchable haven for those growing up watching the programme, doesn’t need its leaky dyke to be made public; it’s not its fault after all.

Media Law - Confidentiality

Official Secrets Act
The Official Secrets Act 1911 and 1989 enforce national security surrounding the UK State or Crown. They place the duty of confidentiality upon employees where work is sensitive. In part this legislation was designed to punish spies who betrayed UK intelligence, but in later years it has applied to those who give away sensitive information to journalists. Usually the person leaking the information can be prosecuted by the Crown, however, if the journalist is seen as an accomplice, he too can be prosecuted. At the same time, a Crown employee who doesn’t give information to journalists deliberately, but leaves it where it can be found or accessed, they can be punished.

In 1998, a journalist was arrested and charged over the 1984 OSA. After publishing his book The Irish War, Tony Geraghty, once the Sunday Times defence correspondent, had published The Irish War, in which he disclosed computerised surveillance in Northern Ireland by intelligence agencies. It took a whole year before the charges were dropped.


The Right to Privacy
It wasn’t until the Human Rights Act 1998 came into place that English law acknowledge the right to privacy. Under Section 8, it guarantees the right to privacy. Even so, more importantly for journalists; when courts are considering injunctions, Section 12 requires ‘particular regard’ for them to recognise freedom of expression covered in Article 10.


Breach of ConfidenceThe law of breach of confidence makes sure that information acquired when given in confidence, cannot be published.

To breach confidence, according to Mr Justice Megarry there are three elements;
- The information must have ‘the necessary quality of confidence’
- The information must have been imparted in circumstances imposing an obligation of confidence
- There must be an unauthorised use of that information to the detriment of the party communicating it


Injunctions
If a person has confided information to a journalist, and they find out that it is going to be published, they can try to get a temporary injunction that prohibits the publication of the confidential information.

In 1984, Southern Evening Echo in Southampton was presented with an injunction from Medina Borough Council, on the Isle of Wight. It stopped the paper from reporting on development plans in Newport, the capital. On arrival of the Hovercraft, the injunction was given which meant that the papers could not be distributed. A new edition had to be distributed to the island.

If an injunction is in place at one newspaper and another in England or Wales learns of the information, they can be in contempt of court if they publish it. This was held in the Court of Appeal in 1987.

Introduction to Journalism - Summary Introduction Exercise

UNISON PROPOSE NEW BUDGET IN PROTEST

Unison workers will make a stand in cities around the country on Friday.   

As a result of the proposals by the government to cut public sector spending, workers will don skeleton outfits in protest to emphasise their concern in London, Birmingham, Leeds, Taunton, Swansea, Newcastle and Nottingham. 

“The Chancellor’s knife is cutting deep. His drastic, hard and fast public spending cuts will cut vital local services back to the bone and throw tens of thousands on the dole,” said Heather Wakefield, Unison Head of Local Government.

There are great fears that the cuts will lead to high streets becoming like ghost towns, and that local economies will die.  Unison, the UK’s largest public sector union, has constructed their own budget that they feel of which the coalition should take note. The alternative ‘fairer budget’ is aimed at taxing the bankers (who they suggest caused the crisis) and higher earners (over £100,000), as well as addressing tax avoidance and tax havens.  Included in the Unison Save Our Services budget is a 50% taxation on those earning over £100,000, seeing a return of £4.7bn a year alone.  In Unison’s eyes the road to recovery will be much fairer, instead of those in the public sector paying the price.

At the same time, unnecessary spending within the public sector, notably the NHS, has been identified.  Unison states that £500m could be saved from hiring cleaners to eradicate healthcare acquired infections.

LONDON CAN SURF UNDERGROUND

BT is to bring Wi-Fi to Charing Cross Underground this week. 

As part of a six-month trial by London Underground and BT, commuters will be able to access the internet via BT Openzone in the Tube station.  The trial will test how successful the service is, part of which is to provide up-to-date service information for London Transport.

“We hope that our customers will find it useful to have access to the internet,” said Richard Parry, Strategy and Commercial Director for London Underground.

As the latest UK addition to the BT Openzone Wi-Fi hotspots; the ticket area and platforms on the Northern and Bakerloo lines will offer commuters the opportunity to surf the net.  This means that BT now has over 1.6 million wireless broadband hotspots.  To connect to the service, passengers will need to be carrying a Wi-Fi enabled device, such as a laptop or smartphone.  However, internet access is only free to those BT broadband customers on unlimited BT FON Wi-Fi minutes, or BT Openzone customers.  Mobile network users of O2, Tesco Mobile, Vodaphone and Orange, as well as other Wi-Fi enabled devices with Wi-Fi minutes in their contract are able to use the BT Openzone network.  It is also possible to buy vouchers online.

London Underground sees the trial as part of TfL’s innovation to find alternative ways to make information more accessible to customers.

IT’S A SLUG’S LIFE

Britain’s 'green fingers' need to take care when using slug pellets during this autumn and winter.  

The warning comes from the Environmental Agency, as they anticipate the increase in slug activity during wet weather.

“If conditions are such that you wouldn’t spray a pesticide, such as when heavy rain is forecast, then don’t apply a pellet,” stated Phil Shere from the Environment Agency.

The Metaldehyde Stewardship Group emphasised in their guidelines the importance of keeping metaldehyde out of water.  They advise on the effectiveness of applying slug pellets, that they need to be spread carefully and accurately, making sure that any applicators are cleaned away from any watercourse.  It is essential not to apply pellets within six metres of a watercourse, or when heavy rain is forecast.  Attention must be paid to the dosage given on the manufacturer’s label. 

Using a much better quality slug pellet is also recommended by the Environment Agency.  This is because the quality of a pellet affects its resistance to wet weather, as well as its success in slug deaths.  If a pellet breaks down quickly, it is more likely to leak metaldehyde into the soil; this in turn drains into a water course and increases the risk of contamination (as well as killing less slugs).

All UK growers and advisors have the responsibility to make sure slug pellets are used in the right way and only when needed, to ensure they do not contaminate the environment.

Media Law - Privilege

Privilege is important to a journalist, as it can allow something to be written or broadcast that could be of a defamatory nature.  At the same time, it can offer some protection from being sued.

There are two types of privilege; absolute and qualified. 


Absolute privilege

Absolute privilege means that any action for defamation is barred, no matter what the comment is.  Unfortunately it is quite limited for journalists to use.  Within Parliament, MPs are able to say what they like, without the risk of defamation.  Only through Parliament published reports (Hansard - the Official record of the House of Commons and House of Lords) is it possible to report every comment, malicious or not and not run the risk of libel.  Even if a journalist is commenting on what has been debated in the House of Commons, they are only covered by qualified privilege.

The only time a journalist is covered by absolute privilege is when they are reporting court cases or tribunals, as what is said in court is often very defamatory.  Without absolute privilege the media wouldn't be able to report about it at all.  It is only if a hearing is held in private that it doesn't apply. There are specific guidelines on what must be included in court reports.

Reports must be fair - when reporting, you must make a summary of both sides, not just one.  They must also be weighted equally on both sides.  Mr Justice Eady stated in 2006 (Bennet v Newsquest) that a report 'must be fair overall and not give a misleading impression...omissions will deprive a report of privilege if they create a false impression of what took place'.
Reports must be accurate - you must report EXACTLY what is said in court, not adding anything or taking anything away from what someone says.  If there is an allegation, you should state the person who is making the claim as well as what they say.  This way you cannot get into trouble for making it sound as a factual statement.
Reports must be contemporaneous - in the Defamation Act 1996, it says that contemporaneous reports are 'as soon as practicable'.  For a daily newspaper, this would need to be the next day, however for a weekly newspaper it would mean the next week.  It should be the next issue of the publication.


Qualified Privilege

This is more day to day things encountered by journalists.  It applies to reports of court cases, public meetings, council meetings and police statements.  To ensure you are covered by qualified privilege, the reports need to be fair (balanced on both sides), accurate, without malice and on a matter of public concern.

There are two levels of Qualified Privilege:

- With or 'subject to' explanation or contradiction
Public meetings - if something defamatory is said in a public meeting and you get the other side, you can run the story.  At the same time it must still be without malice and have public concern in mind. Public meetings include local councils and committees, tribunals, commissions and inquiries.

Associations have a different status (e.g. GMC, FA).  They would usually have a hearing in private and would then come out with their judgement.  Therefore, findings or decisions by the association arecovered by qualified privilege, but proceedings are not.

- 'Without' explanation or contradiction
Public proceedings in a legislature anywhere in the world
Public proceedings in a court anywhere in the world
Public proceedings of a public inquiry anywhere in the world
Public proceedings of an international organisation or conference (Individual interviews must take place in that venue)


Public meetings
Public meetings are discussions of public concern, and the admission can be general or restricted.  Up until 2000, pressers (press conferences) were not seen as a public meeting.  As a result of the McCartan Turkington Breen v Times Newspapers Ltd (2000) appeal, the House of Lords ruled that press conferences were protected by qualified privilege.  In the case, originating from a meeting organised by campaigners for the release of a British soldier, Lee Clegg, the Times reported defamatory comments about the solicitors who represented Clegg.  The solicitors sued the newspaper over the report.  A written press release was also made available to the press, but it wasn't read out aloud in the proceedings, although referred to orally by one of the speakers during it.  Lord Bingham ruled that the press representatives were like the 'eyes and ears of the public' and that the newspaper was covered by qualified privilege, as were the written handouts, also part of the public meeting.

A full report of the hearing can be found at
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldjudgmt/jd001102/turk-1.htm



Remember: there are risks of live broadcasts of public meetings, it is generally a good idea to put a delay in.

Also, there is NO PRIVILEGE outside of main proceedings.

If in court someone shouts out from the gallery, it is possible to report it if the comment isn't defamatory (this would then be reported as ' a member of the gallery shouted out as he was taken away', as this gives an accurate report of the atmosphere inside the court).

I Think It's Time

As my eyes took in the information that my beautiful Swatch watch had departed from my wrist (I had to delve for my buried watch amongst my washing that had just been recovered from the dryer) I was a little taken aback.  After putting my watch into hiatus more than a year ago, and buying another 'cheaper' Accurist watch, I suddenly (upon discovering it in my room at home again) fell in love with it all over again.

Its face, a little more abused than the day I bought it at the shiny kiosk in Kings Cross, still looks appealing, mainly because it is so big you can't really miss the time.  This often works very well when I've not yet put in my contact lenses and can't really see anything at all.  Also, the style is just fantastic; around the steel edge of the casing it has every capital city that Swatch deem important to place carefully round the outside.  The cities match up with the 24 hours (on an inner ring) and I'm sure my watch is trying to tell me how many hours they are behind or indeed in front of GMT, which is rather clever for an inanimate object, but I do get rather confused past 12. 

On the main part of the face, 12, 3, 9 stand out in a large, unmistakable font (you know immediately if you've put it on upside down).  The other numbers clearly aren't vital, as they've been replaced by notches - this, I like to think, implies it indicates "the numerate person's" watch.  I can show off that I know my numbers up to 12, and even know what comes between 12 and 3.  If you can't read my watch, you're not as clever as me.  To complicate things further, my watch seconds run round a tiny clock located at the bottom, where the 6 should be displayed. 

Last but not least, is the date situated at the right side.  The only slight flaw in the overwhelming positives gained from having this (for starters, knowing the date), is that when there are only 30 days (or 28, 29 days) in a month, it takes me about a day to notice.  By this time I've told about 10 people that it's the 31st of September, or the 30th of February.  It then takes about 5 minutes trying to remember how to change the date and not the time.  I usually end up winding my watch forward a day, which takes another 5 minutes.

After fondly recalling why I chose this watch, the sad fact remains I can't wear it unless I spend a small fortune on a second leather strap.  The reason for putting it away in the first place was because the strap was beginning to perish too much and it was obvious that if it wasn't replaced it would die a horrible death.  I'm quite ridiculous and refuse to get anything other than a branded Swatch strap. Superglue as an option did run through my mind, but I'm not what you'd call an expert and visions of ruining the whole watch appeared, which were dismissed quickly. 

So, my dilemma seems to be the following; I don't eat for a month and get a replacement strap, or I make a cup of Earl Grey and admire my new Swatch pocket watch.

Media Law - Defamation and Libel

What is defamation?

This is when something that you write:
- lowers them in estimation of right-thinking members of society generally
- causes them to be shunned or avoided
- disparages them in their business, trade or profession
- exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.

This can also occur via pictures and is a common danger in TV.  It can be through the careless use of a background, shots with voice over can be defamatory.  People or companies must not be identifiable in certain contexts e.g. child abuse and fraud.  'Imprecise' shots make it unclear who the suspect is, or which house is being spoken about, especially when it is terraced or attached to another house.


Reputation is vital to somebody who lives in public life, but also someone who has money. 

Inference
When reporting something, it should be written to be interpreted by the 'reasonable man' .  It is not necessary according to how the person who wrote the piece wanted it to mean, or to extreme views of others, but that of what a reasonable person would take it to mean. 

Innuendo
Is just as big a hazard as inference and this is where a hidden meaning in the report is clear to ones who have a particular knowledge.  The example of Lord Gowrie in 1986, who after the use of 'snort' in a question of what 'expensive habits' he was unable to support on his former income, sued for the creation of the innuendo that he took illegal drugs, in particular cocaine.  He received 'substantial damages'.

Bane and Antidote
The context of a report may remove a defamatory meaning.  In the instance of Charleston v News Group Newspapers Ltd [1995], although actors' heads were super-imposed on porn stars in a picture (something defamatory), it was seen from the text, that the newspaper was reporting a game where this was actually happening (without the actors' knowledge).  The House of Lords applied this rule, saying that most people who read past the first paragraph would realise the report not to be defamatory.

As a journalist, it is important to realise that someone's reputation is key - if they have a lot to lose, they are more likely to sue, so BEWARE!


Libel Defences
- Justification - it is true and can be proven in court.
- Fair comment - honestly held opinion based upon facts, or privileged material, in the public interest.
- Absolute privilege - court reporting.
- Qualified privilege - police quotes, pressers.


Other Defences
- Banes and Antidote - defamatory removed by context (see above).
- Apologies and clarifications - the speed you respond by makes a difference too.
- Reynolds Defence
    - Material must be:
                               In the public interest, a product of 'responsible journalism' (more in favour of BBC).




No Defence
There is no defence for you against defamatory or libel when you:
- haven't checked your facts.
- haven't 'referred up' - you haven't flagged it up to someone.
- haven't put yourself in the shoes of the person or company you write about.
- have got carried away by a 'spicy' story.
- haven't bothered to wait for a lawyer's opinion.

**If there is the option between leaving something out (whilst waiting for the lawyer) or putting it in before the deadline, LEAVE IT OUT**



KEY QUESTIONS
Who am I writing about, could they sue?
Is what I'm writing potentially defamatory?
Do I have a defence? Am I covered?

REMEMBER - Lawyers never mind being asked!

Media Law - Criminal Coverage (Part 2)

Court

When a case reaches court, there is usually a 'pre-trial' or 'preparatory' hearing.  At this point automatic reporting restrictions (mentioned in Part 1) come into place, and a journalist cannot publish anything other than the basic seven points:

1.  Names of defendants, ages, addresses and occupations
2.  Charges faced or a close summary
3.  Name of court and magistrate's name (or judge's name if held at a Crown court)
4.  Names of solicitor and barristers present
5.  Date and place to where the case is to be adjourned
6.  Any arrangements as to bail
7.  Whether legal aid was granted

If the facts of a case are broadcast, they can affect the jury's opinion or ideas separate to those heard in court. This can lead to contempt of court.


Key Stages of Trial

- Prosecution opening
- Key prosecution witnesses
- Defence opening
- Key defence witnesses
- Judge's summing up
- Jury sent out, deliberation and verdict
- Sentencing (this may be adjourned and the journalist with have to return)

When a trial begins, the media can report what is heard in court from that day, whilst the jury is present.  There are rules as to how it is reported; it needs to be fair, accurate and contemporaneous (you cannot report that day's news next week, unless it is a weekly newspaper).  There is no sound recording or photography allowed.

Under 18's are classed as juveniles and generally enjoy anonymity.  Juveniles (10-18 years of age) are usually tried at youth courts, unless it is a very serious case which will then go to the Crown court.  This is illustrated in the case of the murder trial of James Bulger that took place in 1993, where two children (aged 10 at the time of murder) were charged.  Their preliminary hearing was held at Bootle magistrates court, not at a youth court, and the case was sent to trial at Preston Crown court.  During the trial the identities of the children were withheld from being published, by order of the court.  However, on the day a verdict was reached, the judge agreed to the public identification of the two boys (by now 11 year olds), Jon Venables and Robert Thompson.

'We Don't Need No Education' - Well, Not When You're Charging Us That Much!

With every university student, the thought of tuition fees is pushed out of mind whilst studying and replaced with partying and shopping.  The fees are covered by a student loan (if they are not lucky to have parents/relatives to cover the cost) and apart from excessive amounts of paperwork, there is no real concept of owing over £9,000 in fees, and possibly the same in Maintenance loans.

I myself am in that boat, having graduated from university a year ago, I have a rather large debt hanging over my head.  However, I haven't started paying it back yet, not earning enough and then taking on a Postgrad course, it's unlikely I'll tackle any of that debt for a while.  At the same time, I've pretty much resolved myself to the fact I may never pay off my loans!  Some of my friends attended university straight from school, when the fee was just over £1,000 per year.  It turns me a bit green to think if I'd gone to university straight away I'd owe much less and probably hold a pretty good job.  It's best not to think about it and to be glad to have met the people at university when I did!

Even so, the proposition of uncapping the cost of tuition up to more than double the current rates, and owing up to £7,000 a year in fees alone is rather astounding. I would end up waking up in the middle of the night in a cold sweat trying to juggle those amounts in my head.  Thankfully, I only have to have the money up front for Postgrad; well, I'm not sure it is much better (although I'm not quite living on bread and water just yet), but at least it's not going to be with me for another 25 years.

I suppose it's not necessarily a question about rising fees, but whether the education provided by the universities is worth their jump in costs.  Over the last 5-10 years, new universities have emerged, often from former colleges and poly-technics, but do these really give students the high quality of other established universities or do they fall below?  My friends have attended a diverse range of universities, and I have visited several.  It is true, they do differ in their approaches to students; some have a more laid back atmosphere, where others really push their students to succeed.  Unfortunately, some friends attended university where they were let down by lecturers, not providing the training and teaching that they should have had on that specific course.  After confrontations by the students, they were offered alternative lessons, but by this time they were about to leave the university.

This should ultimately cause an underlying worry for new students.  The problem is, those fresh faced 18 year olds won't have a clue what they're getting themselves into, or putting their parents through to fund their life of late nights and late mornings, occasionally showing up to lectures when they fancy.  It's only when they hit 30 they'll realise they owe a small fortune in excess of £25,000.

Media Law - Criminal Court Coverage (Part 1)

Prior To Court

It’s important to find out whether a suspect is under arrest or is voluntarily assisting with police enquiries. As soon as there is an arrest, this makes the case ‘active’ under the Contempt of Court Act thus affecting what the Media can publish about it. Also a magistrates' issue of an arrest warrant makes a case 'active'. If a suspect isn’t arrested but released on police bail, the case is still 'active' until the bail ends without arrest or charge.

Limits to detaining suspects by the police prior to any charge are normally for no more than 24 hours.  If there is no charge, the suspect must be released.  If the crime is an indictable offence (see below), then under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act a police officer of superintendent rank can authorise another 12 hours.  Police can then apply to a magistrates' court for up to a further 36 hour extension.  They can apply again, but in total a person cannot be detained beyond 96 hours.  However, under the Terrorism Act, a person suspected of a terrorism offence can be detained for up to 28 days without charge.


Libel

Even if a media organisation find out that an individual is being investigated by the police or another agency, prior to a charge, and name they release the name of that person or details that will identify them; they have the right to sue the organisation for libel if it doesn’t result in a criminal prosecution. At times, a media organisation may release this at risk, if they have received information that the police are close to charging that suspect (as the libel fades into the background by the actual charge for that person) or if they are quite certain that person won’t wish to alienate the media (i.e. a Celebrity or Politician) by suing them.

There are guidelines on naming suspects in the media from the ACPO. If a person is under investigation but has not been charged, some details may be released as long as the suspect isn’t identified by this information. After a charge has been made, the police will identify the suspect by their name, age and occupation, as well as the charge and upcoming appearance at court.


Criminal Charges

Criminal charges determine where the case will be going, either remaining at the magistrates court or passed onto the Crown court. As a journalist, it is important to know what the categories mean.

Criminal charge categories:
Indictable-only offences, can only be dealt with by a Crown court with a jury trial (after a preliminary hearing at the magistrates court)

Either-way offences, can be dealt with by a Crown court or a magistrates court (depending on what the magistrate decides or whether the defendant elects a Crown court trial by jury)

Summary offences, almost all are dealt with by a magistrates court. There is no right to a Crown court jury trial.
Automatic reporting restrictions depend on the category of the charge/offence and the procedures of that particular court. These restrictions make it illegal to report some details in the media.


Magistrates' powers are limited, and this would be a reason why they may choose to send an either-way offence to trial at Crown court.  They have the ability to give 6 month jail sentences and fines up to £5,000.  They can issue suspended sentences, conditional discharge (conditional on good behaviour over a specific period), community orders, binding over (where you are bound to keep the peace on a sum of money, which has to be paid if you break it) and ASBOs.

Journalists must be aware of accurate reporting of crime charges. For example, a theft is not the same as a robbery which indicates the use of force by violence within the crime. If reported incorrectly, they may be libellous (as mentioned above).

There are usually two parts to a crime, an act (which is potentially criminal) and a guilty mind (meaning the crime was planned and carried out/attempted).  The prosecution generally has to prove both parts, but in some circumstances it is possible a crime can become something different if there was no malice in the action, for example, a killing can become manslaughter or a tragic accident (not criminal).

At the same time, the law acknowledges that a crime can be committed without the need to prove guilty of intent.  These offences are known to be of 'strict liability' and protect a safe and just society.  If a motorist drives with too much alcohol in their system without the intention of breaking the alcohol limit, they are still committing an offence.  In the same manner, if you own a TV and not a TV licence, this too is an offence.

The Price of Primark's Popularity

With the promise, as far back as the summer, of a new Primark store in Winchester city centre, more than just a few students' hearts lept for joy at the idea.  Replacing the BHS store, Primark would occupy a large retail unit in the Brooks shopping centre, a prime location.  Finally, affordable clothing for the residents of Winchester (both students as well as permanent residents) was about to arrive.  The city of Winchester is well-known for its expensive living costs not only in rent but also in its high end retail shops such as Hobbs, Jigsaw and Jack Wills.  It draws in a significant amount of tourists visiting the historical sights, but also the smaller boutique shops.  All in all, shopping in Winchester has remained a costly venture.

Primark began trading as Penneys in Dublin, Ireland in 1969 and crossed the water in 1973 taking on the Primark brand name.  It has always carried the association of lower priced goods and has thrived through developing a wider customer base.  The immediate appeal is to those on low income; this can range from the elderly to students and, as unemployment is set to increase further, many more will become reliant on buying goods more cheaply.

Opening on the 4th October (a day earlier than planned), Primark unveiled its most recent store.  On initial inspection the store ticked all the boxes, catering for all ages (although grumbles of a smaller than desired Menswear section from the other half were ignored). What stood out was exceptional tidiness and a very organised stock; very unlike Primark.  As lovable as Primark is, it's a universal truth that you enter at your own risk, ready to do battle with mounds of unkempt piles. This pristine presentation was brushed off in the knowledge it was the first day of trading and was bound to look like this.  However, closer inspection resulted in a few emerging horrors in the perfect exterior.  Possibly having to look twice at the price tag to double check it has read correctly was a bad sign.  Things went from bad to worse, wafting around the very pleasant and good tempered staff, with the discovery that all items just seemed a little bit too much.

The higher prices made you think again about what you were purchasing.  Was the item really worth it?  Or was it best to hold off?  Of course, walking away from Primark to even New Look proves the store remains cheaper, but at the same time, the quality hasn't increased.  Also what appears unclear is whether prices have been hiked up above other Primark stores, just because of the location and assumption that Winchester customers will pay with no other alternative.  The bosses of the company are laughing, having risen in the public eye as a cost effective brand and yet through this reputation have been able to increase their revenue.

In a way, it feels the fondness I had for Primark has diminished with the disappointment of the Winchester store.  Clothing hasn't declined at Primark, but I couldn't say they warrant what's on the tag.  Primark - who would have thought we'd be paying for the brand name?

Media Law - An Introduction to the Legal System

Knowing the law around Media and how it affects Journalism can act as a distinguishing mark.  Instead of being classed as a 'citizen journalist' (one that needs no professional training or qualifications - that is to say, anyone from the public) you will be make a better journalist. 


Becoming aware of the pitfalls within the profession is vital, without an understanding of Media Law it is possible to find yourself in a situation that could result in your career coming to a swift end.  For example, if a claim in a report turns out to be inaccurate, it is highly likely to result in appearing in court for libel.  This in itself gives a negative reputation to that particular journalist, suggesting that he is unreliable, untrustworthy of producing factual work.


It seems a simple point, but it's important to know when to stop and think.  A fantastic story may take your fancy, but whilst writing the exposé of the year, be sure to check nothing written carries any legal implications.  Don't sleep walk your way into problems, you'll only pay for it in the end.


Although the United Kingdom has an established legal system, it is not contained within a written constitution unlike other countries such as the US.  In contrast, it is made up from a variety of sources such as historic documents (the Magna Carta), Statute Law (Acts of Parliament, notably the Act of Settlement 1701) and case law (the decisions reached by judges and juries).  At the same time, UK law has been affected by the European Convention on Human Rights and the Human Rights Act.  Within the Human Rights Act, Articles 8 (a right for privacy) and Article 10 (a right to freedom of speech) are relevant to journalists.


The UK legal system works on the basic principle that the law is a contract between the monarch and the citizen.  We obey the law in return for the monarch ensuring our access to justice and freedom of action.  This however does not give a person complete free rein, as these actions cannot infringe on the rights of others, security of the state or public order. 


The Queen herself, as head of state is immune from any prosecution.  This is also the same for other heads of state, but this immunity only continues whilst they hold the office.  The Queen holds her office until she dies.
Stephen Bates in an article for The Guardian online (Is the Queen Above the Law?) dryly states if 'she found herself without money to buy something and decided to do a runner - an unlikely prospect - she would not get done for shoplifting'.  This issue of immunity also caused a stir during the Diana inquest in 2007, with the possibilty of the Queen being called to give evidence at court.  The idea of Regina v Regina was a rather strange thought.

Moving further into the Legal System, prosecution is always in the name of the crown within the Criminal Courts.  On the other hand, the Civil Court doesn't involve the state and are disputes between two parties.  To make things a little more complicated, Scotland and Northern Ireland have thier own legal systems.  When reporting nationally, this must be remembered and taken into account.

At the top of the English court hierarchy is The Supreme Court, held in Middlesex Town Hall where the Law Lords sit.  Below this is the Court of Appeal and then The High Court.  After this, the Civil and Criminal Courts are divided separately.  For Criminal Courts, The Crown Court is below The High Court and then the Magistrates Court.  The Civil Courts follow The High Court firstly by the County Court and then Tribunals (usually for Industrial disputes).

This basic introduction to the Legal System will help as a foundation for further information on Media Law in following weeks.