Viewing entries tagged
journalism

Fake News, Science, and Journalism

Fake News, Science, and 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.

 

 

Re-Thinking Journalism

Re-Thinking Journalism

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. 

 

How will the Olympic Channel change television?

How will the Olympic Channel change television?

Over the last year, I've been following the IOC Agenda 2020 recommendation actions around creating an Olympic Channel, which launches on 21st August, straight after the closing ceremony of the Rio 2016 Olympic Games. Here's the article I wrote about it for The Conversation.

 

New Olympic Channel will change the way we watch sport forever – here's how

Andy Miah, University of Salford

As the Rio 2016 games draw to an end, the Olympic Channel begins its life. Following its launch at the closing ceremony of the games, the channel will completely change how we consume television in the future. This new digital platform will operate 24/7 to fill the gap in between games with local, national, and international sporting events. The Olympic Channel is a world first in broadcast history, and may be the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) most strategic move for a decade.

As things stand, the Olympic movement is almost entirely financed by the exclusive sale of broadcast rights. About 74% of the IOC’s total income is derived from this source; the largest chunk of which comes from American broadcaster NBC. For years, critics have said that this leaves the Olympic Games very much in the pockets of television executives – so much so that events are reportedly rescheduled to suit television audiences, rather than athletes.

Yet we live now in a digital era, and television has changed dramatically since the IOC started these contractual arrangements in the 1980s. Today, television sits alongside social media, as more broadcasters produce content for platforms such as Snapchat, Facebook and Instagram.

Twitter is making deals to livestream full Olympic matches within its platform, and the IOC even has its own YouTube channel, which it has been using as an archive of Olympic footage since Beijing 2008. It recently started to upload full match episodes from previous games, which are gathering the lion’s share of the channel’s views.

With such developments proceeding apace, the future of television is uncertain; which makes NBC’s recent decision to pay an unprecedented amount for the US rights to the Olympics until 2032 a significant gamble. By this time, televisions will just be screens onto which we push content from our mobiles. The IOC knows that the days of the television as an operating system are over – and its new Olympic Channel reflects this.

Olympics every day?

It might seem odd to have an Olympic Channel when the games are not on, but in fact it could well offer users a service they didn’t know they needed: that is, a way of connecting with the athletes they care about, in between the games. The channel also wants to own the hyper-local sports experience, which is currently under-resourced by most international and national sports federations. It wants people to log in and follow their sport, and it wants local clubs to broadcast their events.

The channel will start off as a facility to fill the gap between the games. But it won’t make sense to ask followers to tune out once the Olympics begin simply to satisfy broadcasters who have paid to cover them. Instead, it’s likely that those broadcasters will use the platform, and become a big part of it going forward.

Who’s got better tunes, Usain Bolt or Mo Farah? from www.shutterstock.com

The channel also has third-party integration, to make the most of the mobile experience. You can follow Spotify playlists by your favourite athletes, so that you can train to the same music. You can share your data and track your progress using Samsung’s S Health application (Samsung is an Olympic partner). And you can play interactive games during sports events, so that you don’t switch off from the content and spread your attention elsewhere.

The long game

The IOC is playing the long game, and their initiative could become the Facebook of the sports world. Once the platform has a loyal following, the IOC will be able to monetise this in unimaginable ways – perhaps it could even renegotiate its relationship with television broadcasters and sell advertising directly. But it’s likely that some crucial deals will be struck before this situation arises.

For now, the channel will deliver exclusive, behind-the-scenes footage of the games, which will extend viewer interests well past the closing ceremony and into the next Olympic cycle. For a long time, the IOC has emphasised that it is not a content creator for the Olympic Games. But while the channel is not yet covering the games, the fact that it comes out of the Olympic Broadcasting Services (the organisation which shoots all the sport content at the Olympics) means that there will be increasing overlaps between the two.

The challenge will be to ensure that this adds value to the broadcast offer – rather than detracts from it – so that the IOC remains affluent. That said, if the Olympic Channel can run its own advertising and sponsor campaigns, then it can cut out the television middle-man and do exactly what social media does today.

For a century, the Olympic Games have been a litmus test for media change, with slow motion replay, 3D television and virtual reality all being pioneered at the games. This year, organisers have boasted about how Rio 2016 is the first games to be consumed on mobile first and televisions second. Looking at the state of the media today – where companies like CNN are showing a median viewer age of 61 – it’s hard to see much future for television, as we presently know it. But one thing’s for sure – you’ll still be able to watch the Olympics.

The Conversation

Andy Miah, Chair in Science Communication & Future Media, University of Salford

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.

Young Science Reporters #ESOF16

Young Science Reporters #ESOF16

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:

 

Drones for Good?

Drones for Good?

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.

Why a broken Ring matters in the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony (2014)

Why a broken Ring matters in the Olympic Games Opening Ceremony (2014)

IMG_1535.png

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.

Media Ethics: Is the sky falling?

Media Ethics: Is the sky falling?

2010.03.05-PervasiveMedia.jpg

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.

Journalistic Cultures, Moscow

Journalistic Cultures, Moscow

5857377912_d42d80ce0d.jpg

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

news:rewired – beyond the story

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

Leaders Debate

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