Media Ethics And The Public Sphere 2009 10 - Presentation Transcript
MAC373 [email_address]
Where do you stand?
What does it mean to be a journalist?
What is the point of journalism?
Who are journalists responsible to?
What forms should/could journalism take?
The Flat Earth effect
The news factory and churnalism
Lament about contemporary journalism
Impact on public awareness/engagement/opinion
Sets the shape of news landscape
Shapes public awareness of issues
The Flat Earth effect
The journalist as mediator of public knowledge
Journalist as conduit of public opinion
Journalism crucial to democracy?
Evidence for Flat Earth News:
Justin Lewis, Andrew Williams & Bob Franklin, 2008, ‘Four Rumours and an Explanation: A political economic account of journalists’ changing newsgathering and reporting practices’, Journalism Practice , Vol 2, No 1.
Justin Lewis, Andrew Williams, Bob Franklin, James Thomas and Nick Mosdell, 2006, The Quality and Independence of British Journalism , commissioned report for the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust
The construction of the political public
Where are the ancient Greeks?
The polis : open to free citizens
Jürgen Habermas – The public sphere
“ a realm of our social life in which something approaching public opinion can be formed”
An operational public sphere requires…
A knowable civic authority
A gathering of rational individuals
A means of communicating public opinion to the civic authority
Journalists and media act as ‘public organs’
One way of representing the public in the media…
The public inquisitor: the (wo)man for the people?
Kirsty Wark
John Humphrys
Jeremy Paxman
Jon Snow
The Public Inquisitor
Acts on behalf of the media institution
Acts on behalf of the public at large
Carries “celebrity” cache
Have come to act as social commentators
Paxman versus Howard May 13 th 1997
A question of balance…
Broadcast news content required to demonstrate ‘due impartiality’ under Section 5 of the Ofcom Broadcasting Code
Davies claims this pursuit of balance dilutes news and acts as a ‘coward’s compromise’ (2008: 133)
61% of public think the BBC should be free to hold political views ( Guardian / ICM 2009)
Due impartiality
Impartiality itself means not favouring one side over another.
“ Due” means adequate or appropriate to the subject and nature of the programme.
Helps deflect over-emphasis on extreme minority groups
Another way of representing the public in the media…
The political public in action … BBC’s Question Time
The arrangement of Question Time as an instrument of democratic debate
The panel as representatives of positions across the “political spectrum”
The audience as representatives of public interest and concern
The discursive management of Question Time
Chairperson and production team act as agenda setters and arbiters of legitimacy and truth
Chair adjudicates on the extent and suitability of panel responses
Chair adjudicates on admissibility of audience questions according to the established agenda
The public sphere and media conduct
To what extent does participation in the public sphere empower both journalists and other citizens?
Should our treatment of individuals be on the basis of their being rational subjects or their being naïve, potential victims of media/journalistic expertise?
Does this form of engagement qualify as journalism/news?
Should journalism be rational, emotional or opinionated?
Some points to consider
Televised election?
BNP on Question Time (October 22 nd )?
What is the public interest here?
What format should these event take?
How should balance be handled?
Direct public engagement
Guardian/Trafigura/Farrelly gagging order (Oct 12 2009)
Direct public engagement
Streisand effect – networked amplification
Real time news
Real time news
Real time news
Hyper-local public spheres ?
Variants: The popular public sphere
The public sphere operates as a component of the formal political realm
The participatory element of the public sphere can be used in other media contexts
The media and participation
Media principles and ethics founded on the basis of a particular form of ‘public’
Participation (interaction) has become a selling point in itself, recasting the public as consumers
The emerging participatory sphere therefore meets the need of the media
The Media Sphere
“ Through a combination of the market and audience demand, the media becomes a space for public participation and discussion outside of the political realm, which nonetheless has political and cultural consequences”
John Hartley (1996) Popular journalism for the term ‘media sphere’ itself
The reaction of the theorists
Serious political insight requires we look at popular culture as well as high culture
Post-Gramsci (The Prison Notebooks , 1971)
Forms of participation
The telethon (Children in Need, Live 8)
The telephone vote (Big Brother, I’m a Celebrity)
The radio phone-in (Radio 5 Live)
The talk show:
Public discussion (Kilroy, Donaghue, Vanessa’s Real Lives)
Therapeutic (Oprah)
Conflict (Jerry Springer)
The “Popular” Public – Nightmares with Trisha and Jerry
The “Popular” Public – Nightmares with Trisha and Jerry
“ Western man has become a confessing animal”
Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality , Volume 1, p. 59
The “Popular Public – Nightmares with Trisha and Jerry
Confession is a means of reproducing moral subjects.
Sex has become part of a moral discourse.
Confession has moved from the private realm to public spectacle.
The “Popular” Public – expertise, management and power
Jürgen Habermas (1987) The philosophical discourse of modernity :
There has emerged a historically constructed division between “common knowledge” and “scientific rationality”.
Accordingly, within popular forms of discourse, scientific or rational forms are sustained through recourse to authority.
The “Popular” Public – expertise, management and power
Livingstone and Lunt (1994) Talk on television
Popular discussion shows have situated these forms of knowledge together, presenting them (inappropriately) as having an equal claim to legitimacy.
The “Popular” Public – expertise, management and power
Speakers invited to contribute within the frame of an editorial narrative.
Questioning of speakers seeks to contain them within an established agenda, and seeks to encourage them to contribute to that agenda.
The “Popular” Public – expertise, management and power
The place of speakers on the floor is protected by the host.
Speakers are invited to speak on behalf of institutions and disciplines, but their contributions are summarised misrepresented and placed in conflict with the available “lay” discourses.
A new ethics of the “popular”
The emergence of an alternative frame of public service
The stress on emotionality and therapeutic forms
Peter Lunt and Paul Stenner (2005) “The Jerry Springer Show as an emotional public sphere”, Media, Culture & Society 27(1): 59-81.
Questions
Are talk shows sufficiently free from institutional control to serve as a space where public opinion can be formed?
Do they provide freedom of access and voice to the public?
Are they constituted on the grounds of a rational disinterested populace seeking consensus?
Does this qualify as journalism?
The “Popular” Public – discussion points
Is the popular public participation programme a legitimate form of public sphere?
Is the emphasis on programmes such as Trisha on spectacle and televisuality rather than constructive and informative discussion?
Discuss the political and cultural implications of the forms of subjectivity generated in programmes such as Springer and Trisha .
0 comments
Post a comment