Media magazine
MM 38
- Now with modern technology even people in rural communities have access to mobile phones and internet.
- Social networking can allow communication between disenfranchised people all across the world. It can be a vehicle for free dialogue and contribute towards positive changes in societies.
- Social media played its part in bringing about this revolution. This was what was so powerful in the Arab spring. Social media provided a vehicle to quickly amplify public sentiment.
- Recently we have seen evidence of this. The so-called Arab Spring owes some of its success to people’s innovative use of social media.
- In just over a few months and after years of silence people were voicing their total dissatisfaction with their governments. People used social media to unite and to demand change.
- Social media is being used to keep their dialogue moving. Social media such as Facebook and Twitter give such immediate communication. They are examples of powerful social media, dynamic media working in real-time, affording interaction around the world.
- One 17-year-old from Suffolk was banned from using social networking sites for 12 months and was ordered to observe a three month overnight curfew for using Facebook to encourage people to riot.
MM 45
- All media products are constructed with great care in terms of the way messages are communicated to the audience.
- The first stage in creating propaganda is usually to create a scapegoat – an identifiable enemy of some kind, often an individual or a sub-group within the culture.
- Once the enemy has been pinpointed, assertions can be made to create simplified representations of the group.
- The assertions should reinforce the enemy status of the person/group; and through careful selection of information, including facts that support the position and selectively omitting anything that may contradict it, a negative view can be communicated and reinforced by repetition.
- Name-calling, the use of false connections and bad logic can be made to create negative associations all of which can successfully demonise the chosen group – especially if, within all this, the audience’s fear and existing prejudices can be heightened.
- This is often achieved by appealing to emotions and making it appear that everyone agrees with the idea being communicated.
- Propaganda is defined as ‘information of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicise a particular political cause or point of view’.
MM59
- A filter bubble is a result of a personalised search in which a website algorithm selectively guesses what information a user would like to see, based on information about the user (such as location, past click behaviour and search history).
- It was estimated that 78% of Trump’s statements were lies (Pomerantsev, 2016).
- Galtung and Ruge’s (1965) classic work on the ideology underpinning the selection of news stories showed how the production of news is influenced by news values, such as ‘ethnocentricity’, whereby ‘home’ news (either regional or national) takes priority over international stories.
- Since the early 1970s, newspaper circulation in the UK has been in decline as alternative sources of news have appeared – firstly 24-hour news channels, and latterly the internet.
- In Galtung and Ruge’s terms, Facebook is now acting as a ‘gatekeeper’ for news. So who edits Facebook news? Answer: nobody.
- Fake stories, whether propaganda or satire, can appear in the newsfeed amongst genuine stories.
- It is not social media alone that potentially guides us towards consuming fake news. Since 2009 Google has tailored our search enquiries based on our search histories. Its algorithm predicts which sources of information we’re most likely to be interested in, so we might miss out on material that challenges our existing worldview.
- We create our own filter bubbles on social media by choosing who to friend and follow. We are, in effect, placing ourselves in a silo where we might only have access to worldviews similar to our own.
- Fabricated Facebook news stories aren’t the only reason for Trump’s victory in the US election. For example, his campaign spent $90m on Facebook advertising, and the director of its digital strategy claims that this won the election.
- When lies are taken to be truth, we become victims of propaganda; and when opinion leaders then state that the fact their claims were false didn’t matter, it would appear that we are living in a ‘post-truth’ age.
- If the truth isn’t important then we cannot hold politicians to account and democracy is a complete sham.
- Did Trump become President because of lies? It might be comforting to believe so; and if we, as media experts, believe in the power of the media to influence, then it is reasonable to assume that lies promoted on social media platforms played some part in his electoral success.
- However did 60m Americans really vote for him because of what they read on the internet? Probably not. It is much more likely that many millions suffering economically did not so much vote for Trump, as vote against the ‘status quo’, represented by Clinton.
Factsheet
FACTSHEET 104
- In addition, digital media has allowed audiences to have a more proactive relationship with institutions and they can be seen to be much more active than in the past. Audiences can be seen to have more of an impact on production and can even be part of the production process themselves. Some see this as a positive move that reduces the amount of power held by institutions.
- Social networking has become increasingly important as a method of communication, in some cases overtaking media institutions in its ability to get stories out quickly to a large audience. Twitter increasingly is the story as well as the distribution method.
- Some critics argue that information can be lost in the ‘cacophony’ of the multiple voices now available. Lies can travel as quickly as the truth and sometimes it is not easy for audiences to know the difference. Recently, in the aftermath of the Jimmy Savile revelations, false information regarding the identity of another abuser was passed on via the internet with journalists and politician’s wives (amongst others) using Twitter to spread unsubstantiated gossip.
- More and more programmes feature the reading of texts and emails sent in by audience members and Twitter feeds are often integrated into programmes.
- Even though those that comment on-line or who take part in Twitter debates can be seen to be diluting the total power once held by institutions, it has been noted that not all members of the audience participate and power is collecting around certain special interest groups or communities (Mumsnet, 4Chan, Reddit etc.).
- In addition, on-line discussions often veer towards aggression and have often been identified as including sexism, racism and homophobia in the discourse of debate (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2007/apr/06/ gender.blogging). This can be off-putting for many people and limit the debate rather than extend it.
Books
The Newspapers Handbook – Richard Keeble, 2001
Powerful information: Reporting national and local government, John Turner – Page 147
- “Politics is about power and information is power.”
- “Journalists are part of the information business and are crucial in a political process which involves the exercise of this potent force.”
- “People with power, whether they be Cabinet ministers, senior civil servants or chief executives of local councils, have a vested interest, not only in protecting their own power, but also in obscuring the extent of their authority in the first place.”
- “The journalist occupies a pivotal position between those who make and implement important decisions and those who are often forced to comply with such decisions.”
- “Any democratic system depends on people being well informed and educated about politics by a media which gives a full and accurate account of news, encompassing a wide and varied range of political opinions.”
- “The media in general have a large and growing significance on politics.”
- Page 148 – “Agenda-setting and primary definers: here the media are accused less of telling people what to believe, than in providing a more pervasive influence on what people think about and how they make judgements about different issues”
- “Reinforcement and hegemony: here the media are not so much creating attitudes but are involved in strengthening and reinforcing existing beliefs and prejudices. This can be linked to the notion of hegemony whereby consent is sought for those ways of making sense of the world which fit with the perspective of those in power.”
- “Independent effects: there is a growing view that the media have a more direct and independent effect on beliefs and behaviour. New media technologies have as much of an influence on attitudes and behaviour as the uses to which they are put.”
- “Newton (1986) has pointed to a paradox in the media’s impact on political awareness.”
- “Whereas political information is delivered faster to more people, nevertheless the mass tabloids contain only a little political content and what they report is personalised, trivialised, sensationalised and biased.”
- “Consequently, a large proportion of the public is provided with restricted news and knowledge of current affairs.”
- “This contradiction has been discussed by Seymour-Ure (1974) in his distinction of levels of readership between a mass public who mainly read gossip columns and sports pages and are therefore more readily influenced by biased news.”
Online - Up to minute
- Cambridge Analytica, its parent company SCL, and its relationship to the Leave campaign raise questions that cannot be ignored – questions that are vital to the integrity of our democracy and what it means to be a citizen in the digital age. Was the referendum free, fair and legally fought? Were voters covertly manipulated without their consent? And, crucially, what role exactly does Robert Mercer – Donald Trump’s biggest donor and close associate of Steve Bannon – have in all this?
- The Observer revealed that the billionaire hedge-fund owner, and a money man behind Donald Trump, was a key figure operating behind the scenes in Brexit. Andy Wigmore of Leave.EU told us that Mercer is a personal friend of Nigel Farage and that it was he who made the introduction between Leave.EU and Cambridge Analytica. He said: “They were happy to help. Because Nigel is a good friend of the Mercers. And Mercer introduced them to us.”
- Is it the case that our elections will increasingly be decided by the whims of billionaires, operating in the shadows, behind the scenes, using their fortunes to decide our fate?
- It started when the National Park Service’s Twitter account retweeted pictures comparing the crowds for Donald Trump’s inauguration and that of Barack Obama in 2009.
- This, and another retweet about policy changes on the White House website meant the National Park Service was promptly reprimanded and banned from tweeting
- Telling all bureaus to immediately cease use of government Twitter accounts until further notice is something of an overreaction
- Investors take fright as company reveals $457m loss for 2016 and concedes its financial growth is lagging its popularity
- Shares in Twitter have slumped after the tech company suffered a decline in advertising income, despite a rise in user numbers as Donald Trump’s high-profile tweeting helped to advertise the platform’s influence.
- Jack Dorsey, chief executive and co-founder, hailed the growing “impact and influence” of Twitter, saying the US president had “boosted the power” of the service.
- The San Francisco-based company reported annual revenues up 14% on last year to $2.5bn (£2bn). Monthly active users climbed from 317 million to 319 million in the final quarter of last year.
- The tech company is still making sizeable losses, falling $457m into the red during 2016 despite cutting 9% of its workforce, or about 350 people. Its shares fell by more than 11% to $16.54 in early trading on Wall Street after the disappointing set of figures were revealed.
- Twitter has now racked up losses of almost $2.8bn since it floated on the stock market three years ago – at $26 a share – and the latest figures deal a blow to the company’s plan to turn a profit by the end of 2017.
- One figure that will give cause for concern among investors is a fall in advertising revenue in the fourth quarter, down to $638m from $641m in the same period of last year. This was largely because of a slump in revenues in the US, which wiped out gains in Twitter’s international markets.
- The company had reported an increase in advertising revenue in the first three quarters of the year, before the trend reversed in the final three months. This was largely down to a 5% slump in revenues in the US to $440m, a fall that wiped out a 12% rise to $277m in its international markets.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2017/feb/06/super-bowl-ad-prompts-trump-supporters-to-boycott-budweiser
- Advert depicting immigrants inventing the American beer brand leads to boycott calls – and mockery of them – on social media
- This year, during the first Super Bowl of Donald Trump’s presidency, the US brewery Anheuser-Busch used its slot to send a pro-immigration message to the nation.
- The advert, Born the Hard Way, portrays a fictionalised version of the journey of Adolphus Busch to the US, where he would go on to help create Budweiser beer with fellow immigrant Eberhard Anheuser.
- Trump supporters on social media were furious when the advert was launched before the game, vowing not to drink the beer again.
- Trump supporters have recently targeted Kelloggs with the #DumpKelloggs hashtag after the cereal company, along with around 800 other firms, pulled advertising from the Breitbart website.
- Budweiser was not alone in taking the opportunity to troll Trump during the Super Bowl, with Airbnb, Audi and Coca-Cola all airing adverts that promoted equality, diversity and tolerance.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/jan/15/trump-post-factual-presidency-both-victor-and-victim
- The evidence from last week’s hostile press conference is clear: no traditional ‘facts’ can damage a world leader who embodies conspiracy theory
- When attacked – by anyone from Meryl Streep to the CIA – the commander-in-chief of democratic righteousness will kick right back. He’ll say that she’s a lousy actor and Hillary hack. He’ll snarl about intelligence “Nazis”. And he’ll carry on tweeting incessantly.
- So the strategy is clear enough already. Journalism’s twisted titans are supposedly out to get the Donald, out to distort and malign him as though the election had never been.
- Random effusions via Twitter still get newsdesks shifting after midnight. Rationed access to Trump still gets maximum replay (because it remains a scarce commodity). And “dishonest big media” are still in a bind.
- One chunk of public opinion has already decided that “Giving Donald a chance, even though we didn’t vote for him” is today’s pragmatism. Another chunk is out on the streets.
- Observe, too, the way in which, in digital times, one decision to post the whole thing on the net frees other papers to offer links to it. A single click of a decision covers all. There’s no need for everyone to publish: digitally, one is enough. Is that freedom to be righteous and practical, or a freedom to duck for cover? A very post-Leveson situation.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2017/jan/12/debate-double-can-we-trust-our-media-and-is-press-freedom-threatened
- London Press Club to stage panel discussions about the coverage of Donald Trump and Brexit plus the threat posed by section 40
- They will consider the media’s role in its coverage of both Donald Trump’s election campaign and in ther lead-up to the European referendum and its aftermath.
- They are bound to touch on all kinds of related subjects, such as mainstream media’s relationship with social media. Can the traditional press compete with, and possibly counter, Twitter? What can be done about fake news? Do newspapers create populism or respond to it?
- BuzzFeed’s decision to publish an intelligence report filled with salacious and unsubstantiated claims about Donald Trump’s purported behaviour in Russia has triggered a political storm and debate over media ethics.
- The news website posted the unredacted documents on Tuesday, just 10 days before Trump’s inauguration, with a warning that the contents contained errors and were “unverified and potentially unverifiable”.
- The documents, reportedly compiled by a British former intelligence agent, alleged that the Kremlin was “cultivating, supporting and assisting” Trump for at least five years.
- Other media outlets including the Guardian had obtained and reviewed the documents in recent weeks but declined to publish because there was no way to independently verify them.
- The stakes rose on Tuesday when CNN reported that America’s intelligence chiefs had given Trump and Barack Obama a two-page summary of the reports last week. CNN and the Guardian also reported that Senator John McCain had delivered a copy to the FBI director, James Comey, last month, but withheld the documents’ most eye-opening details, citing lack of corroboration.
- “Now BuzzFeed News is publishing the full document so that Americans can make up their own minds about allegations about the president-elect that have circulated at the highest levels of the US government,”
- Ben Smith, the editor-in-chief, followed up a few hours later with a statement that defended publication as an act of journalistic transparency in a hyper-partisan era.
- “Publishing this document was not an easy or simple call, and people of good will may disagree with our choice. But publishing this dossier reflects how we see the job of reporters in 2017.” Smith amplified the warning in BuzzFeed’s original story by saying there was “serious reason to doubt the allegations”.
- “Even Donald Trump deserves journalistic fairness,” tweeted David Corn, Mother Jones’s Washington bureau chief who reported in October on the existence – but not the contents – of memos from a “former western intelligence officer”.
- “Not how journalism works: Here’s a thing that might or might not be true, without supporting evidence; decide for yourself if it’s legit,” tweeted Brad Heath, an investigative reporter for USA Today.
- “The documents are unverified and yet this is a document which is being discussed across media circles and across security circles. If it is being briefed to the president-elect then it’s better to be able to see what he’s being briefed.”
- Roy Greenslade, who teaches journalistic ethics at City University’s school of journalism and writes a column for the Guardian, said the publication of the documents was an error.
- “I’m all for disclosure, but news outlets must act responsibly and should also beware of doing anything that undermines their credibility,” he said. “On both counts, Buzzfeed’s decision to publish the material was an error. It is disingenuous to publish the document on the grounds that ‘Americans can make up their own minds’. Adopting that criterion would allow for the publication of anything irrespective of its authenticity.”
- “In an age where there’s so much active misinformation, and it’s packaged very well, and it looks the same when you see it on a Facebook page or you turn on your television, where some overzealousness on the part of a US official is equated with constant and severe repression elsewhere, if everything seems to be the same and no distinctions are made, then we won’t know what to protect,” [Obama] told reporters in Berlin on Thursday. “If we can’t discriminate between serious arguments and propaganda, then we have problems.”
- “Facebook would have to hire thousands of human beings who are trained to make editorial judgments and could step in and edit news feeds,”
- In the meantime, it’s as if Mark Zuckerberg is using some different version of Facebook unafflicted by hoax stories and misinformation. “The rest of us know too well the corrosive power of fake news.”
- The head of Germany’s foreign intelligence service has warned that next year’s general election could be targeted by Russian hackers intent on spreading misinformation and undermining the democratic process.
- Bruno Kahl, president of the Bundesnachrichtendienst, said Russia may have been behind attempts during the US presidential campaign to interfere with the vote.
- “We have evidence that cyber-attacks are taking place that have no purpose other than to elicit political uncertainty,” he told the Süddeutsche Zeitung in his first interview since he was appointed five months ago.
- The president-elect’s musings are reported as news almost every day, but will the attention help make Twitter great again?
- “It’s like owning your own newspaper – without the losses.” That’s how Donald Trump described the San Francisco-headquartered social media tool in November 2012.
- His prolific and opinionated 140-character outpourings (“tremendous!”, “very unfair!”, “crooked”, “nice”) are amplified by traditional media, reporting on his ad hominem attacks and diplomatic gaffes.
- For Twitter, it’s been a marketer’s dream: barely a day goes by without TV channels, newspapers and websites name-checking the social media platform in stories about what @real Donald Trump is posting.
- Trump hasn’t held a traditional press conference since July 2016, opting instead for combining controlled settings of interviews with Twitter, which he views as a way of “fighting back” against stories he considers to be inaccurate or bad.
- “This is his way of controlling the news cycle. He’s brilliant at that,” said analyst Leigh Drogen, founder and CEO of Estimize.
- Meryl Streep delivered an emotional speech at the Golden Globes in which she criticized Donald Trump for imitating a disabled reporter while campaigning to be president, saying it “gives permission” to others to do the same.
- The US president-elect drew widespread opprobrium in November when he derided the New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski – who had disputed Trumps’s claim he saw “thousands” of Muslims in New Jersey celebrate the 9/11 attacks – while flailing and twisting his arms. Kovaleski has arthrogryposis, a congenital condition that affects joint movement.
- Trump responded to Streep’s speech by describing her as “a Hillary lover”, adding that he was not surprised that he had come under attack from “liberal movie people”.
- He told the New York Times that he denied mocking Kovaleski. “I was never mocking anyone. I was calling into question a reporter who had gotten nervous because he had changed his story”, he said. “People keep saying I intended to mock the reporter’s disability, as if Meryl Streep and others could read my mind, and I did no such thing.”
- Are digital technologies making politics impossible?
- It’s hard to live through the age of Brexit and Donald Trump, of Jeremy Corbyn and anti-Corbyn, without feeling that something has gone wrong with our democracy.
- We fixate on people and personalities, looking for someone to blame for our mutual incomprehension - “It’s her fault!” “It’s his fault!” – when this only makes the divisions worse. But what if it’s not the people that are the problem? What if it’s the machines through which we increasingly communicate that are causing things to fall apart?
- Digital technologies make it far easier than it has ever been to find out what people want – their likes and dislikes – without having to go through the cumbersome business of getting them to vote. You may find that a terrifying prospect. Or you may find it a liberating one.
- That’s another way in which this is an open question: making politics impossible sounds like something to regret, but if politics has become a barrier in the way of getting things done, could it be something to celebrate?
- A genuinely digital currency – on the blockchain model of Bitcoin – could entirely alter the power of the state. Full blown cyber-warfare – with algorithms not human beings fighting it out – might do the same.
- Perhaps instead of being left behind by the transformative power of the digital revolution, politics is about to catch up. In that case, all bets are off. Technologies that have the potential to spell the end of analogue politics do not spell the end of politics altogether. What seems impossible for the current generation of politicians may be a sign of what the next generation will have at its disposal.
- There’s no doubt that digital technologies are changing human behaviour, and not always for the better. The hopes from the dawn of the digital age of a new era of democratic empowerment remain unfulfilled. Intolerance appears to be on the rise. Governments have proved more adept at using this technology to keep an eye on us than we have been at keeping an eye on them.
No comments:
Post a Comment