Newspapers and magazines are not immune to deception. The Press Complaints Commission has censured Chat magazine for printing a staged picture of a murder victim, realistic enough to fool one of the family. The magazine failed to make it clear that the picture of the murder vicitm, wrapped in bin liners and printed beneath the heading "Beaten, raped and brutalised" was staged. The PCC upheld the complaint of inaccuracy but went on to say: "But of particular concern to the Commission was the fact that, in using the misleading picture near to the first anniversary of the death, the magazine also showed a total disregard for the family of the dead woman."
They said that the magazine's "cavalier approach" was a clear breach of the PCC code.
http://www.pcc.org.uk/cases/adjudicated.html?article=NDgyNw==
Thursday, 22 November 2007
BCC and the sound of crying
The BBC has run into another row about deception according to the Guardian of November 16, 2007.
John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford released video of recently-born quintuplets and the BBC used the video, adding its own soundtrack of crying babies. The BBC told the Guardian: "We received the film without sound and although we don't believe viewers were materially misled, we should not have added sound to the pictures."
This is the latest such ethical mistake in a growing list for the BBC that includes premium phone line abuses, faked footage of the Queen and has led to Director General Mark Thompson to try to ban 'noddies' - the method used by TV journalists to allow cutaways and give the impression the interview was filmed by two TV cameras instead of the one that is all news can afford to send on most stories these days.
Adding sound or new backgrounds to video these days is very easy, but careful consideration needs to be given before doing it. I was approached recently by a private group to film my views in a rebuttal of a BBC programme. I was surprised at the use of a white muslin background for the recording, but even more surprised at the sumptious study in which I was shown in the final edit. Chromakey had done its work to set me in this new environment and whilst no-one was materially misled, the recording was not recorded where it was shown to have been recorded.
It is very easy to say that these additions do not materially change the truth, but they are a slippery slope to other editing tricks that do substantially change reality. Putting me in a study befitting a university professor may not be too bad even if the reality is that my study looks more like a library dumping ground. But if the background gave the impression that I was chatting amongst friends, some of whom were later cut into the edit to give views that made it seem I was responding to their promptings, an entirely incorrect picture might have been painted.
The same is true of added audio. Adding babies crying to film of a neo-natal ward may not be too deluding. But what if that crying were added to a documentary about orphanages in Eastern Europe to give the impression that these orphanages were ill-treating their charges? The same is true of adding music. News traditionally does not have a music soundtrack, making it unusual for TV and radio. Ths is clearly because of the emotive effect of soundtracks - it would be impossible to claim that news is unbiased if a sound track were added. But many documentaries now add sound tracks of music, setting the scene and pointing the viewer in a particular direction, often without them realising it.
Adding additional sounds or music, or changing a video background as well as adding or deleting items in pictures or video should be avoided at all costs in order to prevent misleading the audience. Only if some far worse ethical incident would occur if one did not, should this be considered. There's always one surefire way to be accused of manipulating the truth and attempting to deceive and that's by deliberately manipulating the truth.
John Radcliffe Hospital in Oxford released video of recently-born quintuplets and the BBC used the video, adding its own soundtrack of crying babies. The BBC told the Guardian: "We received the film without sound and although we don't believe viewers were materially misled, we should not have added sound to the pictures."
This is the latest such ethical mistake in a growing list for the BBC that includes premium phone line abuses, faked footage of the Queen and has led to Director General Mark Thompson to try to ban 'noddies' - the method used by TV journalists to allow cutaways and give the impression the interview was filmed by two TV cameras instead of the one that is all news can afford to send on most stories these days.
Adding sound or new backgrounds to video these days is very easy, but careful consideration needs to be given before doing it. I was approached recently by a private group to film my views in a rebuttal of a BBC programme. I was surprised at the use of a white muslin background for the recording, but even more surprised at the sumptious study in which I was shown in the final edit. Chromakey had done its work to set me in this new environment and whilst no-one was materially misled, the recording was not recorded where it was shown to have been recorded.
It is very easy to say that these additions do not materially change the truth, but they are a slippery slope to other editing tricks that do substantially change reality. Putting me in a study befitting a university professor may not be too bad even if the reality is that my study looks more like a library dumping ground. But if the background gave the impression that I was chatting amongst friends, some of whom were later cut into the edit to give views that made it seem I was responding to their promptings, an entirely incorrect picture might have been painted.
The same is true of added audio. Adding babies crying to film of a neo-natal ward may not be too deluding. But what if that crying were added to a documentary about orphanages in Eastern Europe to give the impression that these orphanages were ill-treating their charges? The same is true of adding music. News traditionally does not have a music soundtrack, making it unusual for TV and radio. Ths is clearly because of the emotive effect of soundtracks - it would be impossible to claim that news is unbiased if a sound track were added. But many documentaries now add sound tracks of music, setting the scene and pointing the viewer in a particular direction, often without them realising it.
Adding additional sounds or music, or changing a video background as well as adding or deleting items in pictures or video should be avoided at all costs in order to prevent misleading the audience. Only if some far worse ethical incident would occur if one did not, should this be considered. There's always one surefire way to be accused of manipulating the truth and attempting to deceive and that's by deliberately manipulating the truth.
Friday, 5 October 2007
PCC's new code
The PCC's new code on suicide found its first application recently with the Wigan Evening Post having a complaint against it upheld. The paper published a story from a coroner's court giving too many details about the death and "The Commission agreed with the complainant that the newspapers had included too much detail in describing how the suicide happened. " The PCC went on to say: "Inquests are held in public and newspapers are free to report their proceedings, but to abide by the terms of the Code – which sets out standards over and above the legal framework – the papers should on this occasion have been less specific about the method used".
Doubtless the newspaper published the adjudication as it is bound to do by the PCC's rules. However, it didn't take the issue seriously enough to take the story off its website, or to alter it and so at present date, it still remains available. The PCC took a decision in the early part of 2007 to take a regulatory responsibility for websites run by newspapers. Presumably, we can look forward to the Wigan Evening Post being not only the first paper to run foul of the new PCC regulations on suicide but also the first newspaper website to be castigated by the PCC.
Doubtless the newspaper published the adjudication as it is bound to do by the PCC's rules. However, it didn't take the issue seriously enough to take the story off its website, or to alter it and so at present date, it still remains available. The PCC took a decision in the early part of 2007 to take a regulatory responsibility for websites run by newspapers. Presumably, we can look forward to the Wigan Evening Post being not only the first paper to run foul of the new PCC regulations on suicide but also the first newspaper website to be castigated by the PCC.
Sunday, 11 February 2007
Dealing in private information
The Department of Constitutional Affairs has published the responses to its consultation on dealing with private information. The consultation was asking if the penalties for dealing in such information should be increased to include custodial sentences. Those found guilty of buying or selling such information could be jailed. It's a difficult issue. Much information that is presently sold by criminals and others should remain private and there should be severe penalties for those who deal in such information, but there seems to be a strong view that this new legislation should be aimed at journalists and that criminals or others who seek to invade our privacy by hacking into our computers or bank accounts are not the major target. Journalists should be careful when dealing in private information. Only if revealing the information in support of a story that is strongly in the public interest should they consider buying it. However, such stories are, thankfully, published often enough to make sure that there should be strict safeguards to ensure that journalists are not jailed every time someone influential feels that their power is under threat.
Select committee investigates self regulation
The House of Commons Culture, Media and Sport select committee has announced it intends inquiring into self regulation and the PCC code of conduct following the jailing of a News of the World reporter for accessing a royal voicemail and the paparazzi harassment of royal girlfriend Kate Middleton. The investigation will look at whether self-regulation of newspapers is working, whether the PCC code needs beefing up and how newspaper websites should be regulated. The PCC leapt into action, announcing that it would be regulating audio and video on newspaper and magazine websites (it already claimed to regulate text on such websites).
The likely message that the committee will hear from most of those who send them evidence is that there's little wrong with the PCC's code that actually applying it rigorously and with penalties wouldn't sort out. Since the Select Committee said much the same itself in 2003, it seems unlikely they will take a different approach now.
The Committee will act quickly with written evidence to be in by February 26th and oral evidence to be heard in March.
The likely message that the committee will hear from most of those who send them evidence is that there's little wrong with the PCC's code that actually applying it rigorously and with penalties wouldn't sort out. Since the Select Committee said much the same itself in 2003, it seems unlikely they will take a different approach now.
The Committee will act quickly with written evidence to be in by February 26th and oral evidence to be heard in March.
Tuesday, 6 February 2007
Inquiry launched
Pressure continues to build over concerns about media invasions of privacy. The Loreena McKennitt verdict in the Appeal Court has strengthened the use of breach of confidentiality in privacy cases and offers considerable guidance over how to handle intrusion and the direction the courts intend heading.
Meanwhile, MPs have become also become more concerned about privacy invasions and the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee has decided to hold an inquiry into Press self regulation to investigate the efficacy of the Press Complaints Commission. These concerns have been triggered by the recent illegal access to voicemail messages (see earlier post) and the treament of public figures by photographers - a clear reference to the paparazzi harassment of Kate Middleton. The inquiry will ask whether self regulation offers sufficent protection over privacy; whether the PCC code needs amending; whether existing law on the disclosure of personal information should be strengthened and what form of regulation (if any) should apply to online news provision. The inquiry will be quick with submissions invited by Feb 26 and oral evidence in early March.
It's difficult to tell at this early stage how significant this inquiry might be, but with the last inquiry only three years ago, the PCC probably wishes that the CMS committee would go back to worrying about gambling.
Meanwhile, MPs have become also become more concerned about privacy invasions and the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee has decided to hold an inquiry into Press self regulation to investigate the efficacy of the Press Complaints Commission. These concerns have been triggered by the recent illegal access to voicemail messages (see earlier post) and the treament of public figures by photographers - a clear reference to the paparazzi harassment of Kate Middleton. The inquiry will ask whether self regulation offers sufficent protection over privacy; whether the PCC code needs amending; whether existing law on the disclosure of personal information should be strengthened and what form of regulation (if any) should apply to online news provision. The inquiry will be quick with submissions invited by Feb 26 and oral evidence in early March.
It's difficult to tell at this early stage how significant this inquiry might be, but with the last inquiry only three years ago, the PCC probably wishes that the CMS committee would go back to worrying about gambling.
Monday, 29 January 2007
Jail for Goodman
At a time when the Home Office is struggling with prison places, it seems a little harsh to send Clive Goodman, the royal editor of the News of The World, to jail for tapping the phone of Prince William. However his four month sentence will be seen by many as a serious warning that unwarranted intrusions into people's privacy are likely to attract punishment from the courts and minimal sympathy from the public.
NoW Editor Andy Coulson later resigned, confirming the view of many that an editor should know what is going on in his paper and should not be condoning, implicitly or explicitly such intrusive journalism; journalism that is in clear breach of the PCC's code of practice.
No doubt some will see this sentence as an attack on the freedom of the press and the freedom of journalists to dig for stories. Of course it is nothing of the sort. Goodman's ethods were underhanded and deceitful, intended to dig out stories that would boost circulation rather than reveal information of public importance.
What may be worrying is that a rising revulsion about the methods employed by some journalists might allow the government to clamp down on freedom of information and to limit access to data that might be in the public interest, all in the name of protecting privacy. It is vital journalists behave professionally to prevent giving government the excuse to cut off access to those stories that matter.
NoW Editor Andy Coulson later resigned, confirming the view of many that an editor should know what is going on in his paper and should not be condoning, implicitly or explicitly such intrusive journalism; journalism that is in clear breach of the PCC's code of practice.
No doubt some will see this sentence as an attack on the freedom of the press and the freedom of journalists to dig for stories. Of course it is nothing of the sort. Goodman's ethods were underhanded and deceitful, intended to dig out stories that would boost circulation rather than reveal information of public importance.
What may be worrying is that a rising revulsion about the methods employed by some journalists might allow the government to clamp down on freedom of information and to limit access to data that might be in the public interest, all in the name of protecting privacy. It is vital journalists behave professionally to prevent giving government the excuse to cut off access to those stories that matter.
Friday, 19 January 2007
Big Brother row
The big story in Media Ethics today is the Big Brother row. It offers some difficulties to journalists in that reporting it risks repeating some of the material that has already drawn so much criticism. If the material is offensive or likely to spark racial hatred when transmitted by Big Brother, the offence is no less if reported by journalists. Most seem to have coped with this problem by concentrating on the row rather than the detail of what caused it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
.JPG)
.JPG)