Whistle Blower Dies

 

The man who blew the whistle on the extent of the phone hacking by News of the World has been found dead at home and police has said that his death is being treated as “unexplained” and “not suspicious”.

 

I think it’s a huge shame that he passing has come in such an untimely manner. We all now know that many high profile people are involved and implicated in this case. Unsuspicious? I don’t think so. Whistle blowing is a two-edged knife. You can lose your job from the organisation you work for and be shunned by future employers who are afraid to hire you. In Sean Hoare’s case possibly his death? I am in no position to doubt the statements made by the police regarding this issue. All I can do is to give a tribute to Sean Hoare who brought attention of the world to this scandal and to eradicate such practices from journalism.

He possibly gave his life for journalism and deserves to go a hero for standing up for what is right.  Like I said, it all comes down to morals and principles. It can be inculcated into you, but how much you stand by them is entirely up to you…..

Rupert Murdoch has to drop his bid to buy over BskyB

More developments on the News of the World Scandal, Murdoch has dropped his bid to take over BskyB. I have to say that it is only fair that he does not continue any more corporate acquisitions until this mess created by his organisation has been cleaned up. It has been uncovered that there are many allegations of bribery to top officials to get information and this has lead to the arrest of Rebekah Brooks, CEO of News International (Which owns News of the World), the resignations of several high profile individuals including Metropolitan Police Service’s commissioner and Britain’s most senior police officer, Sir Paul Stephenson.

How could this incident have snowballed into such a large mess which is implicating many others, the destruction of the influence of News Corp and most importantly, Journalism as a profession and its credibility. Who is to say that this is not practiced anywhere else? Are all ours phones and computers being hacked into the monitored for the next big news scandal? Heads will definitely have to roll over this incident, but not only the top brass. Every single individual connected to or even have any slightest knowledge of this incident before it broke will have to sit down and reflect. Where is your morality? How could you do something like that?

As much as I respect the work done by Mr Murdoch to make News Corp such a large media conglomerate, not everything revolves around money. Bribery and corruption is a big no no irregardless of who you are or where you are from.

News of the World Shuts Down.

News of the World is in the middle of one of the largest journalism scandals going on in the world right now. Are reporters really so hard up for stories that they had to resort to such measures just to find a story? I don’t think so. They can report about the political see-saw that is going on in Thailand, the growing tensions between a few asian countries over who has claims over the South China Sea, the ongoing debt problems America is getting deeper and deeper into, or even about the upcoming Harry Potter Finale. But no, they had to hack into the phones and lives of others just for a scoop. And now, they are facing the consequences.

Let’s face it, these stories are not as interesting as murder or celebrity scoops. And only in my previous post I have mentioned – Morals Morals Morals. Where were the morals or principles of the reporters or hackers when all these occurred? Did they stop to think about how all these people would feel to have their privacy invaded? Did they stop to think about the consequences and what they would have done if it was done on their own families? I also only just mentioned about privacy in the week before last. And they have to go all out to prove me right or wrong. We have got to stop lining the pockets of these tabloids by not buying their papers. Only when demand dies, will supply die.

I guess that we are all partially responsible for such incidents because we happily consume all that they have to offer, but shun them once it was uncovered. I believe that this is only the tip of the ice-berg and we will see many more such scandals occurring everywhere in the world. News of the World has shut down and rightly so. At least now, I have a topic to link to my final feature article on morals.

Imagine if this occurred in Singapore……..

Moral minefields: Legal and Ethical Dilemma

This week’s presentation conducted by Yale and Josephine on legality and morality is a very interesting topic and may be a dilemma that not only journalists’ face but everybody may face this as well. There are two questions that these people face; It is legal… but is it the right thing to do?, It is the right thing to do… but is it legal?

School children may face this dilemma; I see my bestfriend cheat on a quiz.. do i report him? or my bestfriend wants to cheat off me on a quiz.. should i help him? Therefore, this is a lesson to be learnt right from the start. It is ultimately down to the princples that are instilled in a person.

Now to the problem that journalists’ face. This topic reminds me about an incident not too long ago, Darren Ng’s murder at downtown east. During his funeral, video journalists from Razor Tv went to cover the story of his funeral and took pictures of his grieving parents and did it from a distance away. What they did is legal. But, was it morally right? His parents are alreadying grieving the lost of a son, they did not have to handle the media frenzy that was feeding on their grief. This leads to the other side of the story. At the funeral, friends of the deceased saw the video journalists’ and asked them to leave the family to grieve in peace. But they subsequently began shouting at the video journalists (Who were just doing their job if i might add) to a point of shoving them as well. What they did, is probably morally right… but was it legal?

Therefore, this is a lesson that cannot be taught. It has to come from within. Sometimes doing the right thing may be illegal and sometimes doing the illegal thing may be right? How do we decide? Who are we to judge if it is right or wrong?

Personally, if it were me i would not be so sure about what i would do too.

 

 

 

 

Privacy: Where do you get it? “I’m a celebrity too…” Public Interest VS Public Prurience

This topic presented by Joleen and Khanh sparked a very interesting debate in class. When is it public interest and when it is public prurience? The main talking point? SCANDALS. When is it that a news report is in public interest and when is it in public prurience? Is the scandals that enveloped english football  involving Terry, Rooney, Cole and Giggs to name a few in public interest or public pruience? does it really affect their performances as footballers? or is it because people see them as role models? No doubt the scandal involving former US president Bill Clinton is in public interest, but footballers??

Another talking point, the incident where a lady ran over her own child while parking her car at home. Public interest or public prurience? It is alright for journalists to magnify the pain of the family by publishing it on the front page of the New Paper?Yes there is news worthiness and maybe even a learning point, but is it justifiable that the newspapers are possibly doing this to sell a few more papers?

Many people would say that public figures such as celebrities and politicians have given up their right to privacy. That is true to a certain extent. But is it right to basically invade every single aspect of their lives?

What do you think?

 

 

Journalism and its negotiation online, blogsosphere and social media

Today the presentation conducted by Terence and Yvonne about journalism and social media brought up several interesting thoughts into my mind.

I would like to take the time to share my thoughts about the question posed by Yvonne “If everyone comes to rely on online media, what will happen  to audiences  who are not connected.” There are many people in the world, especially in improverished countries who have not heard of the internet, much less being connected to the internet. We have lived our lives for many years before the introduction of the internet and at the time internet was introduced, there was nothing much of interest to me. However, technology has grown leaps and bounds to become an integral part of businesses and peoples’ lives. I know of people who cannot handle it if they are away from their mobile phones for more than an hour because they have to check their facebook account or even check-in at their location.

Was the internet actually created with a vision for people to check-in at their locations? I don’t think so. The internet was created to share information and help improve the world. Now to the question, there will come a time where probably everything in the world will be linked somehow to the internet and sooner or later everything will go online, although in my opinion, not in the foreseeable future. But there will definitely be people who will prefer the traditional way of doing things. ie: reading print instead of online papers, sending snail mail instead of email.

Therefore, if there really comes a time when everything goes onto online media, the probability that there are still people in the world who are not connected will be close to nought.

Globalisation vs Localisation

Ahh.. This topic has sparked debate ever since it has been introduced.

The debate of whether globalisation is good for the world or whether localisation is a better. This is a highly opinionated question and possibly would still be very difficult to answer many years from now. The only thing that can be done is to add your voice to either side of the argument and wait for one of the sides to win. OR we can just compromise and accept both the positives and negatives of both. I will however, only be elaborating slightly on globalisation as it is an issue that i feel has a stronger impact on me.

No doubt globalisation has been good for the world.

1. More trade between nations (more free-trade agreements being signed)
2. higher flow of communications (we probably will not know about the Japan disaster if not for globalised telecommuncations)
3. more nations standing up to help out others in need (again Japan, and even Libya)
4. increased flow of skilled and non-skilled foreign “talent” from undeveloped or developing nations as cheap labour. (Any of you want to sweep roads or prune trees on the CTE?)
5. Many others to list all of them.

but one must also not be blind to the negatives that globalisation brings.

1. Meltdown of one economy may lead to a global recession (subprime mortgage anyone?)
2. increased flow of skilled and non-skilled foreign “talent” from undeveloped or developing nations as cheap labour. (do i even ned to elaborate?)
3. increased chances of diseases and harmful foods from overseas. (Taiwan foodstuffs anyone? or beans sprouts fom Germany?)
4. Again too many to list.

So is globalisation a good thing? Again, this is down to opinion. At times i love globalisation. But at times, i also detest globalisation. Ahhh… a fickleminded person i am.

So what are your views? Love it or hate it?

Andy and Daniel’s presentation

The presentation conducted by Andy and Daniel was about Citizen Journalism.

The topic is a very interesting one as it hit closer to home with the emergence of Citizen Journalism in Singapore. Stomp has become a very popular website for people to take pictures and stomp about any issue which they feel strongly about. Although the website is currently still being “abused” with posts of people failing to give up their seats in buses or MRTs’, drivers who fail to park properly, complaints of noise pollution early in the morning due to a chinese wedding tradition or even one sided stories without proof, there are other posts which really perk up the interest of readers and generate a large number of comments and debates. Several of these posts have also made it into Asiaone.com and even the new paper.

There is a large potential for citizen journalism in Singapore. However, until people are able to learn to stop complaining about trivial issues and focus on what is really important and report about issues impartially, citizen journalism will only be an outlet for people to complain.

Who pays for Journalism? Is it just about the money?

The presentation that lyon and I conducted today “Who pays for journalism? Is it just about the money?” This topic really made me consider the question about who actually pays for journalism in Singapore, and whether is it really just about the money. After doing research for the presentation and digging up a couple of SPH’s and NewsCorp’s past annual reports to do a comparison about both organisations, totally opposite trends were discovered from the reports. SPH actually reported a drop in daily average circulation/revenue numbers for their newspapers while NewsCorp was able to report a rise in circulation/revenue numbers. This lead me to wonder how it is possible SPH, which is the most established publisher, and that Singapore had a drastic increase in population numbers in the past few years due to a foreign influx and children being born, could report a drop in numbers for circulation. BUT SPH was able to post a record profit before taxes despite the falling numbers. An increase in advertising revenue and revenue from their property arm actually contributed to their profits. This is actually a good sign for SPH as they do not have to depend on just newspapers and magazines for revenue and hopefully never ever make it about the money.