Very excited to publish this article for the Design Exchange, bringing together some of my thoughts about esports and architecture. Some wider work developing around this theme. Check out the article here
Viewing entries tagged
journalism
A couple of weeks ago, I spoke at an event hosted by the British Association of Science Writers focused on Fake News and Scientific Journalism. I was anxious first to draw our attention to the absurdity of this discussion, as it has been inflicted on us by Trump and his ridiculous accusations of fake news towards established, credible media organizations.
Anyway, moving on, we are here, the discourse has taken off and shone a light on how news information becomes indistinguishable from blatantly fake news, but also how it becomes blurred with entertainment.
My main concern in this is are the squeeze that printed press face, as a result of the social media era. We need to find better ways to support investigative journalism, but we also need to understand how people encounter news information across their day and across different devices. Otherwise, we are failing to take into account how this affects their receptiveness to certain media formats, or just the cognitive process that operates around such journeys.
A few weeks ago, we created the Library of Fake News as an installation for the Manchester Science Festival and I believe we need libraries to help us navigate this complex world of web news, where bottom line interests dominate all stakeholders. Libraries may be our only independent public institution that can help us wade through the noise and figure out what's really going on in the world.
Today, I am in Switzerland, giving a talk about how to utilize social media to build a reputation as a researcher. My take on this is to think about how best to utilize the range of creative media around us, as academics, and to explore the overlap between journalism and academia in that pursuit.
This configuration allows us to develop a holistic approach to nurturing reputation, with community building, and awareness raising, while ensuring that we don't treat the media as a static entity.
We need to ensure that our use of media - social or otherwise - is not just about instrumental values, but about co-creating and innovating as researchers.
Last week, I was in Paris giving a talk for the News Media Coalition about how to future proof in a rapidly changing media industry. I covered everything from social media to virtual reality. There's so much work here to be done, but journalism has something we need to protect. Here's my talk:
Over the last year, I've been involved with organizing the European Science Open Forum, through my role on the European City of Science programme. We've produced events all over the region, from performances, to talks, and installations. One programme I have been particularly proud of is our Young Reporters programme. We've had students from Salford and Manchester universities, along with A-level students from UTC Bolton, reporting activity around the conference.
Our students have had an amazing time, meeting Nobel laureates, leading science editors, and covering content from graphene to e-doctors. It's been a fantastic week and such a great experience for all. Here's one of their videos:
My latest piece published in The Conversation takes a look at the Manifesto pledges from a digital point of view.
Today, I published a piece on #drones for @conversationUK, which explores some of the new applications that are emerging and which were showcased at the Drones for Good international prize in the UAE last weekend. Here's the piece in full.
Piece first published in Inside the Games
The Opening Ceremony of the Sochi 2014 Olympics may go down in history as having been one of the most ambitious and accomplished of all time. The complexity and sophistication puts it on a par with the Lillehammer 1994 Games, which is widely regarded to have been a Winter opening without rival.
But there was one problem that became the focus of attention after the ceremony finished. You might not have noticed it if you were watching on television, as the delay from live to broadcast meant that a rapid replacement of prior footage could wallpaper over what really happened.
In the segment when the Olympic Rings were being spectacularly visualised from gigantic snowflakes, one of them failed to expand and achieve its circular form.
So what? You may say. In the press conference that followed, it was apparent that this was a source of frustration for the organisers, who implored reporters to focus on their achievements instead of this tiny failure. The artistic director even said that this was one of the simplest technical moments in the Ceremony.
However, there is good reason why reporters will focus on it, as the presentation of the Olympic Rings is the second most important symbolic moment in the Ceremony, after the lighting of the Cauldron.
It wasn't always like this. In years gone by, the Rings would have just been erected within the stadium from the start of the show. However, in recent years, this segment has become a moment where the hair will stand up on the back of your neck and that moment was lost, at least for those who were in the stadium, which included Vladimir Putin, who was sitting next to International Olympic Committee (IOC) President Thomas Bach and not far from UN secretary general Ban Ki Moon.
So, the significance of this moment is easy to understand. After all, as much as the Games are about the athletes, they are also significantly about those Rings. The entire economic foundation of the movement relies on their sale to the highest bidder. The success of the Games rises and falls on the basis of who has the right to use the Rings.
Thus, the rings have come to symbolise more than just the Olympic values and so their failure to be properly visualised during the Opening Ceremony is to compromise the integrity of that powerful symbol. It is equivalent to the Olympic Cauldron failing to ignite. This need not mean embarrassment but it does mean that an important moment was lost for Sochi.
It would be unfair for the world to judge the artistic merit of the Ceremony on the basis of this one technical fault. Art may deserve a bit more flexibility in terms of how we evaluate success, compared to sport, where only perfection matters.
However, what took place also means that we cannot award the organisers a perfect 10 for their delivery, even if it was the best Opening Ceremony of all time. But at least that means that the next host city has something to strive for how, beyond Sochi 2014.
Besides, the beauty of television means that it won't be difficult for the Olympic organisers to easily dodge international commentary on what happened. For the majority of viewers - and for the record - it never happened.
Talk for the IOC Future of News and Sport Reporting meeting, London 2012 de-brief, at USA Today, New York City, April 2013.
Just published in the Huffington Post
Tomorrow - or later today if I find my password - I will publish this article on the Huffington Post, but here's a sneak preview: Professor Andy Miah considers why the UK Leveson Inquiry into Press Ethics should lead us to conclude that, while journalists shouldn't be hacking our phones, we should be hacking theirs.
The UK's Leveson Inquiry this week brings into focus the many debates that have taken place over the last two months about whether the British media's ethical foundation needs a radical overhaul after the apparent transgressions that have occurred through the News of the World phone hacking controversy. Many of these debates have global implications, given the nature of news syndication today; News International being among the most obvious example.
Much of the moral debate on this subject has focused on the case of Milly Dowler's family who are perhaps the most worthy victims in this situation. The knowledge of their daughter's voicemail being hacked at such a crucial time in the investigation of their daughter's disappearance amplified the trauma they experienced around Milly's death.
However, among the most crucial aspects of this debate is the way that celebrities – notably Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan – have intervened to speak on behalf of a community for which many people are unlikely to find much sympathy – the rich and famous.
One of the challenges with celebrity witnesses in any legal environment is that their creative personas often intertwine with the public's opinion about the merit of their concerns. Who didn't watch Steve Coogan's testimony and expert to hear a joke? And we got one or two. Upon noting that he saw journalists rummaging through his bins he noted that they did not look like tramps, adding “well almost”.
Equally, the reporting of celebrity testimonies occurs via the people who are the subjects of their criticisms – journalists. So, it is always risky when appealing to people with public profiles to establish the facts, especially when attempting to aid the public understanding of legal debates. In part, this is why many courts maintain a distance from media reporting, so as not to pollute the hearing with media opinion.
This isn't the first time that celebrities have questioned the intrusion of the press – the Michael Douglas and Catherine Zeta-Jones wedding photos debacle between Hello and Ok! Magazines or Earl Spencer's pursuit of a European ruling on privacy are two of many more instances that have occurred over the years. Yet, the difference here is that the debate about the phone hacking case has focused more on the ethical rather than the legal changes that may be necessary to make. But, what ethical principles have been broken or which of them should more adequately be upheld?
One of the challenges in this case is that the difference between morality and ethics have been conflated. To be clear, journalists are governed by ethical codes but, in this case, it is the absence of a moral conscience that has caused more outrage, rather than just a transgression from an ethical framework. Codes of ethics compel rather than determine how people will act within a professional context. In contrast, moral convictions tend to prevail without the need for professional coercion.
This difference between morality and ethics is crucial when deciding what should be done. Journalists often operate by their own sense of morality when investigating stories and, at times, this may challenge their Editor's own sense of morality. Sometimes, this is a good thing, especially when Editors become too powerful and a newspaper loses sight of its public obligation, as may be said of News of the World. However, when the Editors and the journalists lose any degree of commonality in their sense of what is in the public interest and worthy of reporting, then we find a situation like the present case.
The public interest and respect for privacy is the standard moral tensions within debates such as this one. Journalists have claimed that there is no better way to find the truth than to listen to somebody's private messages, while the victims of hacking claim that privacy must still ensue despite their celebrity lifestyle.
There are a number of bad arguments that surround this case. It is inaccurate to claim that a person's phone messages are any great insight into truth; they are fragments of conversations at best. Even if they were helpful in determining facts, embracing such modes of practice within journalism would lead to the end of all privacy claims for all kinds of people - perhaps everyone. This would include permitting access to how journalists obtain their stories through coercion or entrapment. We would find ourselves in a situation where homes are wire tapped at will and by a range of institutions on the basis of public interest. The absence of all privacy is unlikely to create a very trusting society, as previous countries that have taken government surveillance too far have found.
Yet, the public interest argument is also disingenuous. To claim public interest over the justification for publishing stories about the sex lives of celebrities is a huge stretch of the concept. In these cases, it is commercial interests rather than public that are served, where the primary beneficiaries are media organizations, not the general public. At most, a member of the public may choose to consume a different form of leisure experience upon learning of any perceived moral transgression of the key actors, but this is hardly a greater good than the harm that may ensue for the individuals concerned, not to mention their families.
Both Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan are right that their being celebrities does not, in itself, legitimate intrusion into their private lives. There is no 'faustian pact' - as Coogan puts it - even for the celebrities who court the media. There must always be a point at which they – indeed, we – can say no to journalists and expect our privacy to be respected. An obvious example of this is reporting on the children of celebrities. Were the concept of privacy completely dead, then we would tolerate many more intrusions than is presently the case. We don't, because privacy still matters.
A second problem concerns whether or not the kind of journalists that are the focus of this conversation should be called journalists at all, as opposed to some other kind of media professional with a different code of ethics and different public expectations. Such a change in status would lead to a situation where the coverage of celebrities would occur via some form of contractual agreement, rather than free press. Importantly, this would not mean the demise of a free press, only that many of the periodicals whose work is primarily entertainment than news would lose these freedoms. I see no great loss in this regard, especially as most so-called news content derives from the work press officers and agents anyway.
There is one other further dimension to this debate that is rarely discussed, which is people's reliance on the media in an era when content is open and available. Most of us don't have time to follow proceedings in full, but today we have the opportunity to watch the full, unedited testimonies of the Leveson Inquiry witnesses without having to rely on a mediated interpretation. Today, public institutions have become news providers and our reliance on traditional media should be reduced considerably. In an era of pervasive media, we have also recreated an unmediated world.
So what is the answer to the question about how the press should be regulated? A number of ideas have been discussed from licenses for journalists to leaving things just as they are and making the present regulatory systems more effective. Some have argued that the system is perfectly fine – the journalists were caught by the system - and that any regulatory system will always be imperfect. As such, the possible loss of a free press that may ensue from tighter regulation would outweigh the possible infractions that evidently do occur within the present system.
The loss of a free press has such great implications for society that the anxieties of celebrity's losing control of their private lives is unlikely to be of any great significance in the grand scale of things. However, public laws are put in place for all kinds of people and we are asked to imagine how they would affect not just celebrities but people from any walk of life who may find themselves in a position of vulnerability, as is true of the Dowler family.
On this basis, change is necessary. Self-regulation with independent auditing is a much better way to monitor ethical practice – it works quite well in hospitals with Institutional Review Boards, for example. The press needs a much stronger internal ethical structure than is presently in place. Such boards should benefit from independent consultation from media ethicists and lawyers, whom are able to critically scrutinize day-to-day practice.
Such a system may also include, for instance, journalists having their own communications recorded in the course of their work, so as to later scrutinize their methods. If call centres monitor the calls with clients, why shouldn't journalists have their calls monitored 'for training purposes'? Journalists shouldn't be hacking our phones, we should be hacking theirs.
Tomorrow, I'll be heading to Russia to speak at Moscow State University for a Journalism conference. Here's the programme.
The 3rd International Media Readings in Moscow Mass Media and Communications – 2011 JOURNALISTIC CULTURES: FACING SOCIAL AND TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGES CONFERENCE PROGRAM November 10, 2011 (Thursday) Registration / Coffee 14.00 Round Table (Russian Language) 16.00-18.00 Room 103 Moderators Dr. Olga Minaeva / Dr. Irina Prokhorova To the 300th Anniversary of Mikhailo Lomonosov, the Founder of MSU Session 1-1 16.00-18.00 Room Newsroom Moderator Dr. Józef Kloch Religious Impact on Journalism Cultures A SPOKESMAN OF A CHURCH INSTITUTION AS A COMMUNICATOR, INTERPRETER AND NEGOTIATOR OF CHURCH’S REALITY IN THE ERA OF SOCIAL MEDIA Monika Przybysz, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland RELIGION IN PUBLIC LIFE OF RUSSIA TODAY Roman Lunkin, Woodrow Wilson International Center, Washington, D.C., USA Institute of Europe, Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia THE JOURNALIST ETHOS AND BIBLE PROFANATION Józef Kloch, Cardinal Stefan Wyszyński University in Warsaw, Poland RELIGIOUS ETHOS AND JOURNALISM ETHICS: RUSSIAN CONTEXT Victor Khroul, Central European University, Budapest, Hungary Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia COMMEMORATIONS: THE BATTLE OVER MEMORY Mihai Coman, Universite Stendhal, Grenoble3, France College of Journalism and Mass Communication, Bucarest University, Romania FAIRNESS AND ACCURACY IN WRITING ABOUT RELIGION - TOO HARD A TASK? Anna Danilova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia MEDIA EVANGELISATION AS A TECHNICAL MEDIATISATION OF RELIGION Daria Klimenko, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Session 1-2 (Russian Language) 16.00-18.00 Room 333 Moderator Prof. Svetlana Balmaeva ЖУРНАЛИСТ, СМИ И ДОВЕРИЕ ОБЩЕСТВА JOURNALIST, MEDIA AND THE SOCIETY’S TRUST Алла Александровна Ширяева, МГУ имени М. В. Ломоносова (Alla Shiryaeva, Lomonosov Moscow State University) СОВРЕМЕННАЯ ЖУРНАЛИСТИКА: РЕВОЛЮЦИЯ ЦЕННОСТЕЙ? MODERN JOURNALISM: REVOLUTION OF VALUES? Татьяна Ивановна Фролова, МГУ им. М. В. Ломоносова (Tatiana Frolova, Lomonosov Moscow State University) ЦЕНТР И РЕГИОНЫ РОССИИ В МОДЕЛИРОВАНИИ МЕДИАСИСТЕМЫ RUSSIAN FEDERAL CENTER AND REGIONS IN MEDIA SYSTEM MODELLING Юрий Михайлович Ершов, Томский государственный университет (Yury Ershov, Tomsk State University) ФОРМИРОВАНИЕ НОВЫХ СТАНДАРТОВ ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНОЙ КУЛЬТУРЫ ЖУРНАЛИСТОВ В ТРАНСФОРМИРУЮЩИХСЯ ПРАВОВОМ ПОЛЕ И КОРПОРАТИВНОЙ СРЕДЕ FORMING NEW STANDARDS OF PROFESSIONAL CULTURE FOR JOURNALISTS IN TRANSFORMING LAW AND CORPORATE ENVIRONMENT Сергей Павлович Булах, Дальневосточный федеральный университет (Sergey Bulakh, Dalnevostochny Federal University) ЭТИКА ФОТОЖУРНАЛИСТИКИ: ОБЛАСТЬ МОРАЛЬНОГО И ПРАВОВОГО РЕГУЛИРОВАНИЯ ETHICS OF PHOTO JOURNALISM: FIELDS OF MORAL AND LAW REGULATION Алексей Маслов, Воронежский государственный университет (Alexey Maslov, Voronezh State University) INSTANT PUBLISHING: РАСШИРЕНИЕ ПРОСТРАНСТВА МЕДИА INSTANT PUBLISHING: EXPANDING MEDIA SPACE Владимир Владимирович Харитонов, Гуманитарный университет Екатеринбурга (Vladimir Kharitonov, Humanitarian University in Ekaterinburg) Session 1-3 (Poster Session) 14.00-18.00 By the Registration Desk Excursions 18.30 November 11, 2011 (Friday) Opening Ceremony and Welcome Addresses to the Conference Participants 9.30-9.40 Room 232 Session 2 (Plenary – English Language / Synch. Translation) 9.40-11.30 Room 232 Moderator Prof. Elena Vartanova Yassen N. Zassoursky, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia GLOBAL JOURNALISTS: WHAT DO WE KNOW AND WHAT SHOULD WE KNOW? David H. Weaver, Indiana University, U.S.A. ACCOUNTING FOR DIVERSITY IN JOURNALISM CULTURES Thomas Hanitzsch, University of Munich, Germany POLISH JOURNALISTS TWO DECADES AFTER THE COMMUNISM Prof. Bogusława Dobek-Ostrowska, University of Wrocław, Poland REINVENTING COMMUNICATION: FROM SAGAS TO TWITTS Andrey Korotkov, State Institute of International Affairs (University), Russia Coffee Break 11.30-12.00 Session 3 (Plenary – Russian Language / Synch. Translation) 12.00-13.30 Room 232 Moderator Prof. Boris Lozovsky ЖУРНАЛИСТИКА В УСЛОВИЯХ ИНСТИТУЦИОНАЛЬНОГО КРИЗИСА JOURNALISM UNDER INSTITUTIONAL CRISIS Светлана Дашиевна Балмаева, Гуманитарный университет Екатеринбурга (Svetlana Balmaeva, Humanitarian University in Ekaterinburg) ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНАЯ КУЛЬТУРА И ПРОФЕССИОНАЛЬНОЕ СООБЩЕСТВО: МЕХАНИЗМЫ ВЗАИМОДЕЙСТВИЯ (PROFESSIONAL CULTURE AND PROFESSIONAL COMMUNITY: MECHANISMS OF INTERACTION) Иосиф Михайлович Дзялошинский, Национальный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики» (Josef Dzyaloshynsky, National Research University – The Higher School of Economics) СОВРЕМЕННЫЕ ТЕХНОЛОГИЧЕСКИЕ ОСОБЕННОСТИ РАБОТЫ РЕДАКЦИЙ МЕЖДУНАРОДНОЙ ГАЗЕТНОЙ ГРУППЫ METRO И ИХ ВЛИЯНИЕ НА РЕДАКЦИОННУЮ КУЛЬТУРУ MODERN WORKING TECHNICS FOR NEWSROOMS OF METRO INTERNATIONAL AND THEIR IMPACT ON NEWSROOM CULTURE Борис Васильевич Коношенко, Генеральный директор-шеф редактор газеты Metro Москва (Boris Konoshenko, CEO/Editor-in-Chief Metro Moscow) РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫЕ СМИ РОССИИ: МУЛЬТИМЕДИА И ЭКОНОМИКА REGIONAL MEDIA IN RUSSIA: MULTIMEDIA AND ECONOMICS Валерий Викторович Бакшин, Дальневосточный федеральный университет (Valery Bakshin, Dalnevostochny Federal University) К ПРОБЛЕМЕ ТРАНСОФРМАЦИИ РЕГИОНАЛЬНЫХ МЕДИАКУЛЬТУР В СОВРЕМЕННОЙ РОССИИ: ЛОКАЛИЗАЦИЯ ИЛИ ГЛОБАЛИЗАЦИЯ? TRANSFORMATION OF REGIONAL MEDIACULTURES IN MODERN RUSSIA: LOCALIZATION OR GLOBALIZATION? Александр Валентинович Чернов, Гуманитарный институт Череповецкого государственного университета (Alexander Chernov, Cherepovets State University) Lunch 13.30-14.30 Session 4 Presentations of the European Journalism Research Groups 14.30-15.30 Room 232 Moderator Dr. Maria Anikina EUROPEAN JOURNALISM OBSERVATORY Natasha Fioretti THE WORLDS OF JOURNALISM STUDY Thomas Hanitzsch JOURNALISM IN CHANGE - PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTIC CULTURES IN RUSSIA, POLAND AND SWEDEN Gunnar Nygren Session 5-1 15.40-17.10 Room 333 Moderator Dr. Anastasia Alekseeva SOCIOLOGICAL CULTURE AS THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTIC CULTURE Maria Anikina, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia MOTIVATION BEHIND THE USE OF SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES AMONG YOUTH IN INDIA Khattri Neeraj, Trinity Institute of Professional Studies, India A CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF SOCIO-CULTURAL IMPACT OF NEW MEDIA ON USERS IN INDIA Usha Rani Narayana, University of Mysore, India JOURNALISM IN AN INNOVATION SOCIETY – A NEW ONTOLOGICAL STATUS? Marina Shilina, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia ETHICS IN JOURNALISM AND SOCIAL VALUES IN A PERIOD OF SOCIAL TRANSFORMATION Inessa Filatova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Session 5-2 15.40-17.10 Room 103 Moderator Dr. Thomas Hanitzch JOURNALISM IN CHANGE – PROFESSIONAL JOURNALISTIC CULTURES IN RUSSIA, POLAND AND SWEDEN Gunnar Nygren, Södertörn University, Sweden THE IMPORTANCE OF JOURNALISTIC COMPETENCES FROM DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVES Carmen Koch, Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Institute of Applied Media Studies (IAM) Vinzenz Wyss, Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Institute of Applied Media Studies (IAM) MEASURING PRESS DIFFERENCES: AN UPDATE Xu Xiaoge, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore THE INSTITUTIONAL ROLE OF JOURNALISM IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CAMPAIGN FUNDING CRISIS IN FINLAND Sinikka Torkkola, University of Tampere, Finland Anne Koski, University of Tampere, Finland Session 6-1 17.20-18.50 Room 333 Moderator Annina Stoffel FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION OF JAPANESE JOURNALISM IN THE INTERNET AGE Watanabe Takesato, Doshisha University, Kyoto, Japan JOURNALISM RELOADED – OR WHAT JOURNALISTS NEED FOR THE FUTURE Alexandra Stark, MAZ – The Swiss School of Journalism, Switzerland NEW GENERATION OF RUSSIAN JOURNALISTS: FROM DIGITAL ADVANCEMENT TO DIGITAL ADDICTION Olga Smirnova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia NEW BRANDED MEDIA: THE FUTURE OF JOURNALISM Anastasia Alekseeva, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Session 6-2 17.20-18.50 Room 103 Moderator Bogusława Dobek-Ostrowska RUSSIAN AND SWEDISH JOURNALISTS – PROFESSIONAL ROLES, IDEALS AND DAILY REALITY Elena Degtereva, Södertörn University, Sweden, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Gunnar Nygren, Södertörn University, Sweden TRANSFORMING JOURNALISTIC CULTURES IN RUSSIA: RESEARCH PERSPECTIVE Maria Anikina, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia RUSSIAN JOURNALISM AS A SOCIAL LIFT Svetlana Pasti, University of Tampere, Finland DIFFERENT JOURNALISTIC CULTURES AND THE NATIONAL IDENTITY IN LATVIA Ainars Dimants, School of Business Administration Turiba, Latvia Dinner 19.00 November 12, 2011 (Saturday) Session 7 Plenary (English Language / Synch. Translation) 9.30-11.30 Room 232 Moderator Dr. Mikhail Makeenko RUSSIAN JOURNALISM; THE CLASH OF PROFESIONAL CULTURES Elena Vartanova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia THE LONG PASSAGE OF HISTORY: THE EVOLUTION OF PROFESSIONALISM AMONG JOURNALISTS AND THEIR INTERNATIONAL CONTACTS Kaarle Nordenstreng, University of Tampere, Finland MEDIA ETHICS IN AN AGE OF CONTROVERSY AND CONFUSION Clifford Christians, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, USA CRISIS OF THE FOURTH ESTATE AND RISE OF THE FIFTH ESTATE Gregory Simons, Uppsala University, Sweden SOCIAL MEDIA: CITIZEN JOURNALISM AT THE OLYMPIC GAMES Andy Miah, University of the West of Scotland Coffee Break 11.30-12.00 Session 8-1 12.00-13.50 Room 103 Moderator Dr. Greg Simons ARE JOURNALISTS REALLY THAT DIFFERENT? A COMPARATIVE LOOK AT THE DEMOGRAPHICS, ROLES AND VALUES OF JOURNALISTS AROUND THE WORLD David H. Weaver, Indiana University, U.S.A. BETWEEN NEWS DESKS, SOCIAL NETWORKS AND CLICK COUNTS – CATALYSTS OF CHANGE IN SWISS JOURNALISM Vinzenz Wyss, Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Institute of Applied Media Studies (IAM) Annina Stoffel, Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW), Institute of Applied Media Studies (IAM) AUTONOMY AND JOURNALISTIC CULTURE THREATS AND OPPORTUNITIES IN A COMPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE Jöran Hök, Södertörn University, Sweden NEWS CONTENT SHARING IN CONVERGENT AUSTRALIAN NEWSROOMS: THE ETHICS OF ONLINE REUSE CULTURE Tim Dwyer, University of Sydney, Australia POLISH JOURNALISTS AND NEW MEDIA: MAINTAINING PROFESSIONALISM OR DEPROFESSIONALIZATION? Bogusława Dobek-Ostrowska, University of Wrocław, Poland Michał Głowacki, University of Warsaw, Poland Session 8-2 12.00-13.50 Room 333 Moderator Dr. Galina Perypechina PUBLIC DISCUSSION AS A HOLISTIC POLISUBJECT TEXT Irina Fomicheva, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia CONTEMPORARY DEVELOPMENT OF DOCUMENTARY CINEMA THROUGH THE MEANS OF INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALISM Renate Cane, School of Business Administration Turiba, Latvia RADIO EKHO MOSKVY AS A PHENOMENON OF CONTEMPORARY BROADCASTING JOURNALISM Ludmila Bolotova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia EkaterinaBolotova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia JOURNALISTIC CULTURE OF THE RUSSIAN TV POLITICAL OBSERVERS: CONDITIONS FOR FORMATION Yulia Dolgova, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia TRAGEDY ON THE RUSSIAN TV SCREEN'11: ETHICAL AND NORMATIVE ASPECTS Yuliya Yakusheva, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia SPECIFIC FEATURES OF MULTIMEDIA CONTENT IN JOURNALISM Diana Kulchitskaya, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Russia Closing Remarks 14.00-14.20 Room 232 Lunch 14.30
thumbnail photo by David Gordillo, Flickr
16 December 2010 at Microsoft UK, 100 Victoria St, London. Looks like I'll be the only academic speaker on the programme; should be fun
Here's the first one with a simple full paste cloud of the transcript from the British Government party leaders' first debate on ITV. Interpretations? A couple of notes. Where the speakers' name is mentioned by another speaker or the Chair, then it is in Title case eg. Gordon Brown. Where it reflects a statement made by the person, it is in upper case eg. NICK CLEGG. This may tell us - as it should - that each speaker had equal time to speak, as was required in the rules and that the name 'David' was less frequently used than either Gordon or Nick, which seem used in equal measure. This may be some route into making sense of what was said and it's got to be at least as good as Mori's 'worm', which was perhaps the worst representation of public reactions to the speech I've ever seen.
In any case, the funniest elements of this wordle has got to be the word 'old' which appears in 'Brown' and the fact that 'think' (indeed, 'make MPs think' if you read a little more widely) is the most frequent word - if only! Roll on debate number two! (pun intended).
http://www.wordle.net/. Images of Wordles are licensed by Creative Commons