30/11/2016 - German spy chief says Russian hackers could disrupt elections

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/nov/29/german-spy-chief-russian-hackers-could-disrupt-elections-bruno-kahl-cyber-attacks

The article talks about how Germany's head of foreign intelligence service has stated that the UK's general election could be targeted by Russian hackers with the intention to spread misinformation and lies in a bid to sway voters to a specific party. He talks about how Germany's intelligence services has reason and evidence to believe that cyber attacks are occurring with the sole intention of creating political uncertainty and that Russia may have been behind cyber attacks during the US Election.

• "Russia may have been behind attempts during the US presidential campaign to interfere with the vote."
• In 2015, an attack on internet in the German parliament was blamed on Russian hackers by German intelligence. 
• A report published this month by the Atlantic Council on Russian Influence on France, Germany and the UK, pointed to an extensive Russian “disinformation campaign” being carried out in Germany, which it said had “opened opportunities for the Kremlin to influence German politics and the public debate”.

Putting aside the politics of the situation, its very interesting to note how new digital media and new technology have had such a huge impact on the way society perceives politics and current affairs that in some cases it's power can be taken advantage of to create uncertainty. Many including the article speculate the ideas of how cyberwarfare will increase in the future as there have been a greater amount of cyber attacks and concern for privacy in the past and most likely in the future. 

30/11/2016 - Here's the truth: 'fake news' is not social media's fault

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/nov/23/heres-the-truth-fake-news-is-not-social-medias-fault

The article focuses on the recent controversial issue of fake news during the US election and the EU referendum and how the circulation of these fake news resulted in negative outcomes. The article creates an alternative perspective on the fact that a lot of people have been criticising social media as the reason for the increase in fake news being generated, which Greenslade argues is not true. He does however give credit to the theory that social media allows for greater and faster spread of the fake news.

• "Last week, the students’ union at City, University of London passed a stupid motion banning the Sun, Daily Mail and Daily Express from the campus"
• None of the 500 or so students currently studying journalism at City voted for the motion.

I personally agree with Greenslade, it is not the social media outlets that are actually creating the fake news, but the power of voting amongst users which allows greater spread and views for these fake news websites. However over exaggerated a news story might be it will be a lot more likely to pick up more hit counters or likes and spread, which means that the truth would be buried amongst the lies a lot quicker than it would for example traditional media sources.

Marxism & Pluralism: Alain de Botton on the news

To what extent do you agree with Alain de Botton's views on the News?

Personally, to some extent I do agree with Alain de Botton's view on the way the news industry works. Through the process of gatekeeping and mediation, news institutions tend to leave out information which is then not presented to audiences. Furthermore, this starts to in a way funnel the type of information that audiences consume. I also agree that in the modern age, it has become increasingly more difficult to get audiences to care about news and current affairs that would be beneficial as information, as opposed to news that might be purely for entertainment such as celebrity gossip. I personally think this could be due to the fact that audiences have now got a lot more control in what they consume and an increase in soft news would be dominant over hard news.

How can you link Marxism and Hegemony to de Botton's criticisms of the News?

Alain de Botton's views are very critical of the way news works and the content it outputs to the audiences. This can be especially linked to the ideologies of Marxism and Hegemony as they instill the idea that news is dumbed down in order to create as much of an audience turn out as possible which would create greater profits rather than hard news that is a lot more critical and creates greater autonomy.

How could you use Pluralism and new technology to challenge de Botton's views on the News?

The pluralism ideology focuses more on the idea that there is greater freedom amongst audiences and society. The use of new technology allows this and reinforces the thinking behind the ideology. Newer technology allows the audiences to have a lot more power and freedom in what they consume, which proves that news and media is not used for social control by the government but rather as a way for audiences and society to gather whatever information they want whether that is soft or hard news.

Choose two news stories from the last six months - one that supports de Botton's views and one that challenges his belief that the News is used for social control.

Supports: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-38146394

Argues: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-38151669

23/11/16 - Obama is worried about fake news on social media – and we should be too

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/20/barack-obama-facebook-fake-news-problem

The article talks about in question the recent uproar in the way Facebook's algorithms work on it's newsfeeds. It talks about how during the recent US elections, many of the content shared by users on the website was in fact actually fake news. Since then, a lot of websites such as Facebook and Google have decided to crack down on the amount of fake user generated content which tends to spread quicker than legitimately sourced and cited content. This controversy is notable with the articles by the "Denver Guardian" a fake news website which aimed to piggy bank on the notoriety of the regional "Denver Post" to the point where the latter had to write a disclaimer that the former was a fake website. 

• 62% of US adults now turn to social media for some or all of their news, according to the Pew Research Centre
• "Of all the content on Facebook, more than 99% of what people see is authentic"

Personally, it's a very interesting controversy to keep track of in the rapidly expanding industry of the media. The way news has worked has always been varied on the internet, we've always been told never to believe what we are told on the internet yet we as a society have completely disregarded this rule that our parents told us growing up and have ultimately put the same people in power that fed us these lies. Or have we not? It can be argued that the people that put these in lie upholding politicians into power are not the digital natives that grew up not trusting whatever they read on the internet, but the millennials and baby boomers, who, for most of their adulthood didn't experience the internet until the last decade, and have yet to experience that what they read on the internet cannot be trusted. Perhaps the fact that electing someone like Trump or voting for Brexit will be their crude awakening to that cold fact.

23/11/16 - In the new robopolitics, social media has left newspapers for dead

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/nov/18/robopolitics-social-media-traditional-media-dead-brexit-trump

The article talks about the way social media played a huge part in the way politicians and campaigners targeted the populace in an attempt to get their messages across. Specifically speaking, sites such as Facebook and Google have specially crafted algorithms which make targeting and marketing to specific demographics incredibly specific as well as easy. This was the main reason why the internet left many traditional platforms in the past and paved the way for the future in terms of ad revenues. Brexit's lead campaigner admitted in an interviewer how social media was a far more efficient and cheapest way of getting the message of the campaign across rather than traditional platforms.

• Leave campaign turned to Social media for advertising rather than traditional platforms which would have cost £5-10 million
• Messages were tested for their ability to motivate people to vote.

I personally think the way politicians decided to use the social media to their advantage was very clever. However it is also important to note the dissolving of real life journalism, which can be seen as it can be argued that due to the seamless non stop flow of social media, there is no mediation and therefore no filter. It doesn't actually matter if journalists would call out the claims made by campaigners and politicians to be true or false, the fact that a controversy would be made in the first place would be enough to create momentum for their campaign.

NDM: Marxism, Pluralism and Hegemony

Research the Ian Tomlinson case. What would the traditional, hegemonic view of the police be in a case like this? How did new and digital media create a different story? What does the police officer's subsequent acquittal suggest about the power of new and digital media?
The traditional hegemonic view of the police in this case would be that they knew best at the time, as they were the peacekeepers and had power over the protest situation. However, the new evidence in the form of digital media challenged these hegemonic views and showed audiences how those with power are not always right. The acquittal of the police officer suggests the regain of power and hegemony to the people, it is a democratic view that allows the people to question those in power. It also shows that new and digital media arms society and those without a voice as a weapon in the war against unjust hegemony.

What does the author argue regarding whether hegemony is being challenged by Web 2.0? 
The author argues that hegemony is being challenged by Web 2.0 in the sense that the ruling classes and institutions no longer have the power and control over the lower classes that they once had, this is hugely due to the fact that the internet has given the voiceless a platform to voice their opinions, therefore leveling the playing ground for voicing opinions.
In your opinion, does new and digital media reinforce dominant hegemonic views or give the audience a platform to challenge them?
I personally think that new and digital media actually challenges hegemonic views quite regularly as platforms such as social media gives everyone the chance to voice their opinions especially those without power. Furthermore, if you are someone with a lot of power you have no advantage over those that don't on the internet. Services such as WikiLeaks also work strongly to hold hegemonic powers to account by leaking to the masses the private and illegal workings of corrupt governments.

Do recent world events such as Brexit or Donald Trump's election in the US suggest dominant hegemonic ideologies are being challenged or reinforced? There are arguments for both sides here - explain your opinion and why.
It can be argued that the outcome of Brexit and the US election were both unexpected in the sense that Donald Trump voters and Leave voters were never considered to win by the populace. However through the use of social media, especially in the case of Donald Trump who campaigned vigorously through his Twitter account, it has given the underdog a greater voice, bypassing the barriers of popularity and power affecting vote turnouts. People had the idea to no longer be afraid of their own views and vote for what they believe was right, however shocking or unpopular. 

Citizen journalism catch up work

Why is citizen journalism important?
Citizen journalism is important as the power to make and break news has moved beyond the traditional news institutions. This has given audiences a huge amount of power, not even in terms of the fact that they can now choose what they wish to consume, they can have a huge impacting factor on what it is that they are consuming in the first place. Furthermore, institutions generally can't be everywhere at once, by utilising their audiences as citizen journalists, it gives them an upper hand in beating their competition as they would be able to break the news a lot quicker than other people.

What should happen to the police after this incident? 

The police in the video should be held accountable for their actions, especially the officer that resorted to a choke hold. The officers were clearly in the wrong, as they did not care for the safety of Eric Garner at all, he was already restrained and was crying "I can't breath" yet they were still trying to restrain him.

What has happened to the Chelsea fans identified in this video?

The four Chelsea fans identified in the video for their racism are now banned from all future football matches for a period of 5 years.

Why might this type of news appeal to a younger audience?
This type of news is raw and unmediated, it shows the footage being taken from the perspective of someone that was actually there and the shaky cam suggest the danger and real life experience of the event. This is the type of news that would appeal to younger audiences as they are more likely to consume raw unmediated news.

Strengths: characteristics of citizen journalism that give it an advantage over traditional news.

Weaknesses: negative aspects of citizen journalism.
Opportunities: elements that TV News institutions or audiences could exploit citizen journalism to its advantage.
Threats: elements of citizen journalism that could cause trouble for the TV News institution or audience.

16/11/16 - NextUp: can it become the Netflix for British standup comedy?

https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/nov/16/nextup-stream-netflix-for-british-standup-comedy

The new streaming service called NextUp is aimed to find a wider audience for the shows that are shown in the Edinburgh fringes and tours. The service is dubbed the "Netflix for upcoming British comedy". It allows users to watch new and upcoming comedians with their standup shows and sets on demand for a low subscription fee. Comedians are very interested as they are said to have been agreed for at least 50% of the income that would go to them. However, there is so far no estimations of how many users and subscribers are predicted or even how much income is estimated.

• Comedians will share 50% of the income
• No projections for what actual sums might be involved
• The company partners with Turtle Canyon Comedy to produce its content

I think it is an interesting new app that shows promise. Many upcoming comedians are forced to upload their sets to YouTube with little to no control over the monetisation which I can assume that their income from the ad revenues would not be as much as the 50% promised from the new service. It also means that they will have a lot less work to do as the entire shows and sets would be curated properly and professionally onto the service. However, I would say that the paywall of the subscription fee is what makes me sceptical of the service as YouTube provides a very similar service for users at no cost, however NextUp's subscription fee might discourage users.

16/11/16 - Google will soon ban fake news sites from using its ad network

http://www.theverge.com/2016/11/14/13630722/google-fake-news-advertising-ban-2016-us-election

The article talks about how Google and Facebook has been criticised at their lack of ability to handle the news that many would consider to be misinformation or false. These fake news websites are essentially were most prominent during the US Election as a way to confuse the voters and in a way sway the way voters would vote. Many would argue that due to the increase in new and digital media, Facebook and Google are now considered prime sources of information and by allowing fake news websites to show up on their search engines, they are promoting a bad message for their companies.

• Google under fire for not taking necessary steps to prevent fake news  across the web during the 2016 US election
• Google already prevents its AdSense program from being used by sites that promote violent videos and imagery, pornography, and hate speech.
• Facebook had developed a tool to identify fake news on its platform, but chose not to deploy it 

Personally, this is a very interesting debate, because we must try to realise that at what stage do we consider news to be fake or misinformation. At any stage of mediation, a piece of news is remade to deliver a specific agenda or preferred dominant reading. Many big newspapers do this as a way to create a bigger audience for their companies, so who would be the one to decide which news is real or not? Prime example being FOX News. However, it should also be noted many websites such as TheOnion use news as a way to present satire by creating "fake news" in a way, would these then be banned by the companies? I honestly believe that websites which purposely have an aim to create misinformation should be removed, such as the Denver Guardian, which used the advantage of an official newspaper called Denver Post's name to spread misinformation during the elections.

NDM News values

Come up with a news story from the last 12 months for each of the categories suggested by Harriss, Leiter and Johnson:

• Conflict - The Syria Conflict, War on Terror, ISIS
• Progress - StopFundingHate campaign, Britain coal power, "funnel" on Mars
• Disaster - New Zealand earthquake
• Consequence - David Cameron austerity cuts, Britain coal power
• Prominence - US Election 2016, John Lewis advert, 
• Novelty - John Lewis advert, "funnel" on Mars

What example news story does the Factsheet use to illustrate Galtung and Ruge's News Values? Why is it an appropriate example of a news story likely to gain prominent coverage?

What is gatekeeping?
Gatekeeping process that results in news that is being sent for publication or distribution on any type of platform to be mediated or edited in one way or another to promote or reinforce a specific dominant reading.
What are the six ways bias can be created in news?
The six ways that bias can be created in news are through selection/omission, placement, use of names/titles, by headlines, photos, captions, camera angles and by choices of words.

How have online sources such as Twitter, bloggers or Wikileaks changed the way news is selected and published?
Online sources have changed the process of gatekeeping quite drastically. The process is a lot more minimal with these sources, such as Wikileaks which states it's a raw source of information. This leads to the fact that many online sources require minimal to almost no gatekeeping at all, they information that they publish is very rarely processed with specific agendas or preferred dominant readings.

Give an example of a news story from the last 12 months that was reported as a result of online technology - Twitter, Wikileaks or similar.
Panama Papers - The leaking of 11.5 million documents detailing financial and attorney-client information for more than 300,000 off shore entities which involved many high profile politicians and celebrities. It was leaked by an unknown anonymous source to several journalists and papers.

What does this reveal about how Sky views Twitter as a news source?
Sky views Twitter as a solid source of citizen journalism, as it is able to get people messaging them with evidence and content that have experienced the breaking news as first hand experience. It means that because of this quicker acquiring of content for their news outlet, they would be quicker in releasing news compared to their other competitors.

What does it say about how news is being produced?
It tells me quite clearly that due to the increase in social media and new digital media, the creation of news content has increased rapidly. The process of news content being created is a lot more quicker than it used to be which means that audiences are able to find out information a lot more quicker than they used to be able to.

What role does the audience have in this process?
Due to social media and new digital media, the audience is now able to play a critical role in the process of news creation which is they are essentially contributing a huge part to the aspect of citizen journalism. This is when the audience and consumers actually have the power to directly contact news outlets with content for the news and essentially on the role of both consumer and provider.

Why might this be a problem for journalistic standards?
This creates many problems for the news industry, especially considering that news journalists are experts in their fields, and news outlets go through a rigorous process of editing and mediation where low content news wouldn't necessarily reach the outlet. This means that as anyone can create their news that there would be a greater dilution in quality for news, as evident due to the major increase in clickbait articles and listicles in the modern era.

In your opinion, how has new and digital media technology changed Galtung and Ruge’s news values?
In my personal opinion, I do not think that new and digital media technology has changed the way Galtung and Ruge's news values are used in the modern era. This is due to the fact that I believe many if not all of them can still be applied and are generally used in the media industry as a way to determine which news values higher than others and how to adapt certain news stories, using the theory, in order to make sure it sells a lot more.

How would you update them for 2016? Choose SIX of Galtung and Ruge's news values and say how each one has been affected by the growth of new and digital technology.

• Elite nations and people - It's interesting the way this has adapted, with the introduction of a lot more services such as Twitter and Instagram which allow celebrities to interact with their fans on a day to day basis, it means that celebrity news and gossip is a lot more likely to sell faster
• Predictability - I would like to argue that this has changed quite drastically, with news platforms many articles would create a preferred or dominant reading to give the audience a certain view. However, with the introduction of new and digital media, the audience can see the perspectives of many different audiences and this can alter whether or not there will be a surprise for certain news. 
• Balance - Many news outlets would have purposely picked a balance of positive and negative news stories to affect the audiences, however with the introduction of new digital media, it's up to the audience if they want that balance, which can result in an imbalance
• Negativity - I would personally argue that this news value hasn't changed much, as bad news still sells a lot more but with new digital media, audiences can choose whether or not they want to be consuming negative news to a greater extent
• Immediacy - With the increase in citizen journalism due to an increase in new digital media, there is a greater speed in the way breaking news is presented to the audiences
• Unambiguity - Many news sources online no longer go through an extensive gate keeping process which results in a lot more ambiguous and opinionated news rather than hard cold facts. 

09/11/16 - Politics has gone wrong. Is digital technology to blame?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/31/politics-digital-technology-brexit-donald-trump

The article focuses on how the use of digital media has altered the way politics and politicians are viewed by a mass audience. In many ways, it can be argued that new digital media creates a level of transparency as voters and campaigners are able to see the demographic more clearly which means them more susceptible to targeting and users are able to find out the likes and dislikes of other voters. This in a way dilutes the political debates surrounding different parties as like minded voters are more likely to interact with each other on the internet leaving no room to open thinking and more ignorance.

I personally feel that the way new digital media influences politics is huge. Social media for example provides EVERYONE the platform to voice their opinions, popular or unpopular, left wing or right wing. I feel this in turn creates a problem for politics as the less educated, ignorant and hateful opinions are most likely to be the most heard and visible due to Galtung and Ruge's theories. Essentially it will create a negative impact and image of politics as it will be seen a lot more negatively, putting many people off voting, which in turn is a critical blow to democracy and society.

09/11/16 - Make Google and Facebook pay for public service reporting

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/nov/08/make-google-and-facebook-pay-for-public-service-reporting

The National Union of Journalists and the Media Reform Coalition are hoping to urge politicians to add a new amendment to the current digital economy bill going through parliament. The new amendment would force digital giants such as Google or Facebook to fund public service reporting and citizen journalism in Britain. This proposed fee would be a 1% levy that would go to the public service reporters.

• Proposed 1% fee payed to citizen journalists
• Channel 4 used this strategy in the past
• National Union of Journalist's general secretary says it is a "necessity"

Personally, I think an amendment like this is somewhat crucial in the new age of digital media. This type of amendment would keep the interest of the public and society in the form of journalism intact, as it would promote the ideologies of citizen journalism in society. Furthermore, it will encourage citizen journalists to work harder for the interest of society and public service as there will be a fee for their work which will also encourage them to strive for greater accuracy in their work, thus no longer reducing the amount of clickbait articles and increasing the quality of overall citizen journalism and social media news.

NDM News: Hyper-reality and the digital renaissance

Examples

• Television and cinema 
• The internet 
• Social networking and social media 
• Skype, FaceTime other video based chat services 

Theory (audience reception etc.)

Voyeurism? Instant content, live streaming

Benefits to institutions

• Very useful to institutions as young people are more likely to use these services 
• They can easily target this demographic a lot quicker than before 
• Will help them to understand the future generation's wants and needs and shape their services for long term future investments 

Benefits to audience

• Content is so much quicker and people hardly have to wait 
• Increased interconnected amongst society 
• Greater access to knowledge and cultural sharing, breaking down of cultural barriers and ignorance 

Wider issues and debates

• Privacy, government control through the use of laws and acts 
• Hackers of cloud based services 
• How much mediation is enough or too much? 
• Monetisation of live content 
• Censorship, live content of battlezones, too brutal or is society desensitised? Is it crucial to society seeing this hyper reality? 

SHEP

• Social - Users are a lot more interconnected and much more likely to come together for shared interests and demands 
• Historical - Rapid expansion of media faster than any other platform in history. Makes new historical firsts 
• Economical - Ways for institutions to use it to their advantage and monetise in some way, could be a negative I personally believe 
• Political - Political aspects of elections are a lot more widely accessible but also negative as politicians see this as a way to pander to the young voters by using said apps, e.g. Hilary Clinton 

The article was written in 2009. Offer three examples of more recent social networking sites or uses of technology that support the idea of a 'digital renaissance'.

• Twitter - Allowing the user base of celebrities direct contact, also the sharing of popular news stories and articles 
• Instagram - Photo based application that promotes brands and celebrities through the use of sponsors 
• Snapchat - Photo based application used widely amongst young people that has revolutionised the way news and content is consumed. Return of vertical video, 10 second for the lack of teenage attention span 

How do live streaming services such as Periscope or Facebook Live fit into the idea of a 'digital renaissance'? Are these a force for good or simply a further blurring of reality?
Periscope and Facebook Live are applications that have revolutionised the digital media in such a way that the demand for content to be consumed has increased a lot more. Users no longer want to have to wait for their content hence the increase use and demand for live streaming services. I believe these can be forces for good as it could increase the amount of people that are coming together for shared interest but it could also mean bad news for television or other broadcast services.

How can we link the 'digital renaissance' to our case study on news? Is citizen journalism a further example of hyper-reality or is it actually making news more accurate and closer to real life?

I believe we can link the digital renaissance to our case study on news as it is something that is heavily influenced on the advancement of technology which directly has an impact on digital media as well as traditional news platforms. The increase in citizen journalism through the use of social media is something that breaks down the aspect of news and information being mediated and allows audiences to experience stories at a more of an emotional and personal perspective as an audience rather than from the perspective of an institution who might have other hidden agendas in the form of dominant or preferred ideologies and readings.

NDM News: Citizen journalism

Examples

• Rodney King, police brutality - 1991, Los Angeles 
• Asian tsunami - December 2004, India/Bangladesh/Indonesia 
• 7/7 bombings - July 5th 2005, London 
• 2007 Virginia Tech shooting 
• Bombings - November 2008, Mumbai 

Theory (audience reception etc.)

• Surveillance 
• Crowdsourcing 
• Two step flow model? 

Benefits to institutions

Institutions generally can't be everywhere at once, by utilising their audiences as citizen journalists, it gives them an upper hand in beating their competition as they would be able to break the news a lot quicker than other people.

Benefits to audience

The power to make and break news has moved beyond the traditional news institutions. This has given audiences a huge amount of power, not even in terms of the fact that they can now choose what they wish to consume, they can have a huge impacting factor on what it is that they are consuming in the first place.

Wider issues and debates

• Monetisation of free content 
• User privacy would be a huge issue and debate 
• Dumbing down society due to content that anyone can make anywhere anytime 

SHEP

• Social - Use of social media rises a lot quicker and society becomes a lot more interconnected 
• Historical - Digital revolution, fast rapid expansion and evolution one that has never been seen before in history 
• Economical - Huge lasting impacts on media industries in economical terms as many traditional platforms would be going out of business due to the rise of new digital media 
• Political - Politicians will tend to use UGC and new digital media as well as social media to their advantage to pander for votes 

What is meant by the term ‘citizen journalist’?

Citizen journalism means when the general public collects, reports, analyses and distributes news and information. Most commonly through the use of social media.

What was one of the first examples of news being generated by ‘ordinary people’?

One of the first examples of news being generated by ordinary people was back in 1991, when Rodney King was arrested and beaten by four Los Angeles police officers, this was all filmed and distributed by a near by onlooker recording everything on a camera phone that had become a lot more common. The home video footage made the news and was the focus for complaints for police officers and cases of police brutality.

List some of the formats for participation that are now offered by news organisations.

• Social media such as Twitter 
• Comment sections on blogs 
• Message boards such as forums 
• Chat rooms 
• Questions and answers 
• Polls 

What is one of the main differences between professionally shot footage and that taken first-hand (UGC)?

User generated content footage tends to be a lot more raw and uncompromising. First-hand is often more emotive as it is a lot more closer to the scene compared to professionally shot footage which are almost always behind police lines due to regulations. Profesionally shot footage a lot more mediated and first hand UGC content is unmediated which audiences can experience a lot easier through news makes audiences relate to the the stories a lot more.

What is a gatekeeper?

A gatekeeper is someone or a process that results in news that is being sent for publication or distribution on any type of platform to be mediated or edited in one way or another to promote or reinforce a specific dominant reading.

How has the role of a gatekeeper changed?

Users and audiences are able to create content whenever they want and send it in as much as they want with little to no limits. This means it's up to the gatekeepers to turn the high frequency content into actual news in a way, rather than actually getting news and mediating it with preferred or dominant readings.

What is one of the primary concerns held by journalists over the rise of UGC?

Journalists have to worry about their positions at media institutions as it is very likely that in the future fewer and fewer trained journalists or staff at news organisations would be needed due to them going out from the rise in citizen journalism and social media.

Offer your own opinion (critical autonomy) on the following:

What impact is new/digital media having on: 

• news stories - I believe that news stories have been diluted with weaker and soft news as the content no longer interests those with intellectual interests in terms of hard news with the increased usage of clickbaits and listicles. 
• the news agenda (the choice of stories that make up the news) - The news agenda changes up quite drastically as they are a lot more focused on staying in business and revenues which mean they are more likely to focus on using soft news rather than hard news 
• the role of professionals in news - Professional journalists no longer have the same power they once had in terms of holding the power and corrupt to account in the forms of investigative journalism.

02/11/16 - Why do we still accept that governments collect and snoop on our data?

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/30/government-data-collection-citizens-acceptance-global-rights-privacy-free-speech

The article talks about how the recent film about Edward Snowden and other changes in the law and policies has resulted in worldwide attention on the scope of government surveillance programs. One of the biggest cases for this was the fact that a British court admitted that British intelligence agencies were acting unlawfully by hiding away a huge amount of spying programs for the decade, yet the worst part was that they claimed it was right and had no intention of owning up for their mistakes. The article also talks about how government surveillance violates rights to privacy and freedom of expression which are rights that are granted to everyone by international human rights law, yet we still as a populace allow governments to exploit our basic privacy rights on a daily basis.

• British intelligence were taken to court for exploiting these privacy rights
• The case went to European court of human rights, a principal submission was filed
• The court plays a role in critical role in the international human rights system 
• Enforcing the European Convention on Human Rights, a treaty ratified by 47 nations
• The NSA was recording every single phone call into, out of and within at least two countries
• It was also collecting data from Google and Yahoo user accounts which the companies allowed

I personally think it's ridiculous that governments as well as big corporations are able to get away with this type of behaviour, this could possibly due to the lack of journalism as a whole, as journalists have lost their power in holding the powerful to account and exposing the corruptions. This is evident as the whistle blower Edward Snowden wasn't actually a journalist. However, I do believe that despite the court cases taking too long, they are being processed through the proper structure of the justice system which is fair.

02/10/16 - Teens should be educated about safer sexting not just abstinence, report says

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2016/oct/31/teens-should-be-educated-about-safer-sexting-not-just-abstinence-report-says

The article focuses on the aspect of young teenagers using digital media as a way of sexual interaction amongst each other. It talks about how a report from Yfoundations regarding youthful populations health and public policies suggests that teenagers should be educated on how to "sext" more safely and be respectful of each other rather than be persuaded by educational materials to not "sext" at all.

The article also talkes about how Prof Catharine Lumby from Macquarie University, a researcher of young people, media consumption and relationships says that "young people are the future" not the "paternalistic and authoritarian approach to young people that we seem to have"

• Sex educators should accept that digital technologies will be used for dating, sex, friendship and romance by young people
• This behaviour should not be ignored or condemned
• "Shame based education acts as a preventative barrier for young people to access mental health, medical or youth services at a time of need"

Personally, I think it's great that authoritative figures such as Professors and parents will be able to use this research to see that a preventative and "fear inducing" education is not the way to prevent things but rather embracing new changes and accepting that this is what young people do, will help to understand actions a lot more. It also means that this will allow adults to use the research and understandings of young people to further improve medical services.