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.