NDM News Case Study index

1) Institution: the impact of Google on the newspaper industry
2) Ofcom report: how news consumption has changed
3) The future of newspapers: Build The Wall analysis
4) The decline of newspapers: the effect of online technology
5) The future of journalism: John Oliver and Clay Shirky
6) The decline of newspapers: Media Magazine case studies
7) Citizen journalism and hyper-reality: Media Magazine article and questions
8) News Values: theory and updating them for digital media landscape
9) Marxism & Pluralism: Media Magazine article and questions
10) Alain de Botton on the News: lecture and questions

NDM News Stories

#1 Broadcasters warned against using children's photographs from social media sites
#2 Facebook and Twitter join coalition to improve social media newsgathering
#3 Meet Snapchat's 'dudeocracy' of talent
#4 BBC Radio 1 aims to be 'Netflix of music radio' with phone-first strategy
#5 Rinstagram or Finstagram? The curious duality of the modern Instagram user
#6 Facebook inflated video viewing times for two years
#7 Twitter pays £1.24m in UK tax as revenues increase by 30.5%
#8 Ad-blockers: are publishers tempted to feed the hand that bites them?
#9 I'm with you on the digital revolution, it's the lack of journalism I can't face
#10 Trump's groping boasts inspire thousands of women to share sexual assault stories on Twitter
#11 Social media can be a pretty ugly place if you're a woman in politics
#12 Newspaper websites suffer post-Olympic dip as print sales hold steady
#13 Local newspaper content too full of listicles and clickbait - lecturer
#14 Lessons to be learned as the Buenos Aires Herald goes weekly
#15 The new social: brands are embracing private sharing
#16 Invasion of the troll armies: from Russian Trump supporters to Turkish state stooges
#17 Facebook faces calls for greater transparency amid 'fake news' row
#18 Twitter suspends American far-right activists' accounts
#19 Fake news clampdown: Google gives €150,000 to fact-checking projects
#20 Platforms v creators: the battle for the internet economy

Marxism & Pluralism: Alain de Botton on the news

1) I agree to a large extent on Alain's view of the news. The fact that the two possibilities of keeping control of the population is very fascinating. First possibility is, to stop all news from being given to the population to ensure that they have no idea about the out-side world they they won't care for it anymore. The second one (which is what still happens in today's society), give the audience so much news that they will forget about it. This is something that still is in use today, as there will be so many news headlines the audience member will find it hard to keep track of what they just read a few hours later.


2)  News corporations are very much trying to control and influence the consumers by the content they give out. This links in with the Hegemony theory as the news tires to inflict its power amongst those below it, be it the lower class etc.


3)
With the birth of new technology such as the internet, it has given more freedom to the consumers and they are not as passive as they once were. What de Botton argues is that the consumer is very passive in today's society due to the overflow of news being given to them all at once. However, there wasn't a lot of reflection on the other side of the argument. That digital media has allowed audience members to challenge those views.Things like blogs and comment sections allow the audience to give their opinion on a news story and if a particular issue is found, it can quickly raise awareness than it previously wouldn't have had.


4) 

News story: De-railed train

The story of the train that de-railed in England was a story that was quite significant locally, but was a story that the majority of society had forgotten. Stories such as Andy Murray's number 1 ranking was one of many stores that week that overflowed this stories significance. Even as a consumer myself, I had completely forgotten that this story even existed as there was so much news being pumped out that it was hard to remember what had even happened yesterday. So much news is being reported, that there will only be 30% that we will remember the next day and will probably forget the next week entirely.

News story: US election

This was a story that again was covered in so much detail that it made the consumers sick and tired if learning more about it. News coverage of the candidates for the election was non-stop for the last 6 months leading up to election day. so much coverage, although it got people knowing about the event, it made people (including US citizens) uninterested in learning more about the election as they had been fed too much of it. 

Platforms v creators: the battle for the internet economy

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2016/nov/11/platforms-v-creators-battle-internet-economy

This would mainly talk about how social media sites try to make sure that they are advertising on videos that are "advertiser-friendly".  This would be because of the controversy that a business assumes it wold have if it is advertising on controversial content. However when a big company like YouTube tries to make it easier for its audience to understand what may not be "advertiser-friendly", then this had outtraged the consumers who use the service with the hashtag "#YouTubePartyOver". 

In my opinion, I think that the masses are just over-reacting when they realise that they won't be paid for distributing controversial content. Although it would be their main source of income with the monetisation of these videos, then this would highlight th distraught and anger that they would've had. Although the users should understand it from an advertiser's perspective in the sense that there shouldn't really be a lot of drama over the updated notification that would help users understand that their content may not be advertiser friendly.  

Fake news clampdown: Google gives €150,000 to fact-checking projects

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/17/fake-news-google-funding-fact-checking-us-election

This news story would look into the fake news stories that would have sprung up. Google is now trying to debunk the fake stories since they would have a negative influence on its users. 

• "Google has given €150,000 to three UK organisations working on fact-checking projects to help journalists and the public avoid falling for fake stories and bogus claims"
• Another €50,000 is being given to a project called Factmata, developed at University College London and University of Sheffield.

In my opinion i think that this would bring in a positive impact on news distribution as it could crack down on fake stories. As well as that Google have also made it a financial incentive to take down false news websites that would change the perception of an audience. This would be good because it could prompt websites to try and make sure that they ban them and present more truthful reporting on the news.

The decline in newspapers: MM case studies

The New Day
1) The New Day was trying to get into a new market. In this case it had tried to be a lite version of The Daily Mail. 

2) It is stated that "about 6 million people but newspapers everyday. However it has decreased as another statistic that talks about the downfall of readers state that "Over 1 million people stopped buying newspapers in the past 2 years".

3) This newspaper would mainly target men and women aged 35-55 and it would look in to the modern approach to news.

4) In my opinion, I think that the main reason why The New Day had failed spectacularly would be because of its "bite size information". Considering that newspapers are known to be extensive upon its method of distributing the news, since The New Day was designed to be short. An example that was mentioned in the post was that the coverage for  The Panama Papers would be covered in two brief paragraphs that would total to less than 50 words. This could show that The New Day wasn't really known for its extensive research into their coverage.

The Guardian
1) Garnered over 120 million readers with a daily average of 9 million online readers on the month of June 2016. A third of the 9 million readers are from the UK. Although there is a "poor circulation" wit the print as that has only had 161,000. In comparison to The Telegraph which had 472,000. In 2015, The Guardian had lost around £70 million.

2) The Guardian had tried to reverse this loss by cutting back 20% and shelving of plans for the Midland Goods Shed which would've been used for community gatherings and public events. 

3) The global event that The Guardian had won awards for was their coverage of the Paris Attacks. 

4) In my opinion i think it would be enough for them to try and globalise The Guardian since it would be able to help them survive from the losses from the print version of The Guardian. As well as that there is also the option to try and make sure that they could rely on advertising. However advertising might be considered very intrusive and therefore it may not be a welcome addition to the globalisation.

Twitter suspends American far-right activists' accounts

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/16/twitter-suspends-american-far-right-activists-accounts

Twitter ends up removing accounts based on hate crimes.Especially considering that this would be the twitter of those who are far right that are known to have a very discriminant view on politics. 

• "So far, though, the service has just 12,000 users, making it small in comparison to other far-right meeting places such as Stormfront".

In my opinion, this would highlight how Twitter are trying to regulate its website. Although the internet is known to be a place where there is freedom of speech, this would present the contrast that Twitter is a restrictive place that wouldn't allow for discrimination to be publically viewed. This is a good way to prevent criticism from spreading which can show that social media websites have a slight form of control and regulation.

Facebook faces calls for greater transparency amid 'fake news' row

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/nov/17/facebook-transparency-fake-news-advertising

This story highlights how Facebook has had to now try and make sure that people know what stories a re fake and what aren't. This would mainly be because of the lack of truth that may actually influence an audience into believing the lie. This would be bad as it would have negative impacts o those featured as an audience might use these websites to influence others.

• "The errors include over-reporting time spent reading Instant Articles, on which Facebook partners with publishers including newspapers to run stories and split ad revenue, and overstating how many people see a Facebook page a month by 55%."

In my opinion I think that Facebook is finally cracking down on a bad aspect of Facebook. This although should've been done earlier because of political events such as the Presidential Elections would suggest that an audience doesn't know what is right so they would believe in the stories that are in their social media because of how much easier it is to go to an article online. And since articles are known to be trustworthy, audiences may believe in these stories.

NDM: Marxism, Pluralism and Hegemony

1) In my opinion i think that the hegemonic view on the Ian Tomlinson case would be that without citizen journalism, it would've reported that he had collapsed wit the police force trying to help with medics. However if it wasn't for new and digital media, the view point of the Police Force as a violent force wouldn't have been investigated. Since the footage took the perspective of the recorder, then this would've presented a new story that flips the perspective of the story to bring a negative light on the police. The fact that ther police statement was published as "news" would present that those with authority are seen as trustworthy sources since the police are generally seen as enforcing the law against those who don't follow. Following the law would be seen as common sense so those who would go against the police with the footage presenting a new light presents how hegemony can be disrupted. 

2) The writer argues that hegemony is being argued. However it isn't entirely being argued to the extent that the masses would understand what is common sense and what isn't. Although the internet can be considered a place where people can state their opinions, it has also become the place where it would feature opinions but to a good standard. This would be because of how the internet has shifted thew power so that people can then express their opinions. 

3) I believe that to this day, there is some form of hegemony seen across news papers, but it isn't as used, or seen often than it previously was. This was because before the digital age where consumers could have the voice and ability to challenge stories, they were passive readers. The news was something far more than information, it was a way of life. It was the only way to know what was actually happening on the other side of the world, and since there was no media platform to challenge this, readers grew passive and believed (consumed) every peace of news given to them

4) I believe that the media will find any possible event or news story to attempt to use hegemonic ideologies in their piece. This is because it is something that the whole world 'cares' about and that they will consume every piece of news to benefit their interest. Since demand for news stories such as the ones above were so big across the world, this gave the media the ability to try regain their power and influence amongst its audience. News stories by The Sun did this to a large extent where they shared their views on the US election showing who they believe to be better and focusing their entire article slamming the other candidate. Why?. Because they know how passive their audience members will be, and internet is of no power when it comes to stories such as this. Broadcast and newspapers are the ones that gain the most power during events like these. 

Invasion of the troll armies: from Russian Trump supporters to Turkish state stooges

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/2016/nov/06/troll-armies-social-media-trump-russian

This would look into the troll culture that has been in the internet. This has mainly been around because of the anonymity that the internet can give to a user. With this as a bonus that would explain how comments can be said without consequence no matter the topic, can be infested by trolls that might make fun off or tease the topic into annoying people. This culture has now also affected their political values that we would have.

In my opinion I think that the culture of trolling isn't as much of a threat as people like this article make it seem. Although they may have their reasons for doing these actions, it just shows how reasoning with people has now gone if trolls can influence undecided voters into which side they vote. This would just present how it may not be as much of a threat as to why they would influence a vote. And if people are easily deceived by sarcastic comments then this would ruin a democracy. However it does depend if the user understands that the comments are just poking fun at the elections rather than making valid points.

The new social: brands are embracing private sharing

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media-network/2016/nov/02/new-social-brands-embracing-messaging-services

This story would mainly be about messaging services. It would also talk in the end about how it could also replace email. Alhough it does mainly talk about the option of advertisng in messaging services and how this might be intrusive since it might distract the user from typing a message.

• Gartner predicts that by 2021, 20% of all activities an individual engages in will involve at least one of the top seven digital giants

In my opinion, I think if they end up advertising in messaging services, then this would be a distracting element for users as they wouldn't be accustomed to the change of having adverts while they are typing a message. This could have a negative impact on the company that might use this advertising scheme since it would put users off.

NDM: News Values

1) Conflict: Syrian War
Progress: Brexit Aftermath
Disaster: Earthquake in Italy
Consequence: Sam  Allardyce a former England manager has been sacked due to price fixing of players
Prominence: American Presidential Elections (Dependent on view point) 
Novelty:  Facebook needs an editor

2) The example used to display Galtung and Ruge's News Values was with the british Servicewoman who was killed in the bomb blast located at Afghanistan. This was considered newsworthy as although it is located at Afghanistan, the victim that had died from the blast is British. This would therefore give the story a cultural connection with the audience. As well as that it can also be argued there is an aspect of shock factor in this story. This would be because of the mention of the second servicewoman who would've died. This might also be significant as it would be surprising for the readers that a bomb disposal member would've died as they aren't normally associated with the death toll since they would be known for disarming bombs.

3) Gatekeeping is the process that would filter out any news items that would be considered not "newsworthy" and instead would keep the stories that may align with their agenda or political position.  As well as personal agenda, it would also be used to filter out any content inappropriate to the audience that the content is being distributed to so that it is safe for for the audience to consume.

4) It has been highlighted that there are six ways in which bias can be news.

• Bias through selection and omission: As previously mentioned in gatekeeping, this would represent bias by choosing which stories are to be in the news as they would be considered "newsworthy" for their suggested audience.

• Bias through placement: This would be considered bias because it would determine where on the paper the story would be. Most of the stories that might catch a readers attention or one that is controversial. Although stories that aren't going to entice readers would be the placed somewhere in the middle or maybe last.

• Bias by headline: This would be bias as it might use language that only readers of that newspaper might want to hear. An example of this would be a newspaper that would be left-wing. Most of the headlines would then have to align with their needs by simply having it.

• Bias by photos, captions and camera angles: Newspaper outlets might also use photos that would place a certain perspective on the topic. This could either have a positive or negative impact on the topic or person.

• Bias through names and titles: Even the choice of name would also have the reader assume that they know who they are talking about. Since they would choose these people for their article then that would mean that the target audience would know who it is.

•  Bias by choice of words: Even the choice of words can be considered as bias. The wording of the article could also have the same effect as the photos in the sense that it could have a positive or negative effect on the topic. Although it does depend on the stance of the news outlet.

5) These media outlets allow the audience/people gain access and freedom over news they want to here from, that may have been mediated for censored prior. This is because news used to be the dominant factor over its audience, whatever they produces their audience consumed. However, the digital ages has allowed news that was censored to give that freedom t the audience who deem it important compared to mediated version. In other words, it gives the audience the true perspective of the story rather than being edited and been shown a specific angle.

6) There was a video that was captured using Facebook's latest feature 'Facebook live' which allowed a black woman to record her husband being shot in a car by a police officer. She captured the entire scene and it was used as evidence in court. This was a coverage that wouldn't have been world news as it would have likely to have been sealed in American doors and the whole world would have forgotten about police brutality. 

7) It shows how dominant the social media platforms are on the audience. If news were to ever break, we (the audience) view it on a social media site like Twitter as that is the most convenient and efficient way of receiving news than compared to Sky as they have to spend hours of filing and checking their facts before publishing their articles, and audience acknowledge that. 

8) This effect in tern has changed the role of journalists. In the 21st century we (the audience) are now experiencing a range of citizen journalism being reported to news. Citizens who report the news are effectively replacing the journalists in the news industry as the news is being solved before someone has to go out and solve it themselves. 

9) The audience have gained a more significant role ever since the digital age rose. It has given the audience the most power, and the institutions have lower power. There is a power reversal where it is no longer the audience being passive and consuming the news, but institutions are the ones consuming the audiences news and reporting it.  

10) Quality. It is said that citizen journalism brings with it a lot of pros to the industry and to news in  general. However, it seems to have brought along many cons, many of which is the loss of quality for news. Previously, news was very top quality report, file checks and numerous hours of source checking to ensure that all data is accurate for the audiences to consume. However this 'new' story telling has lost that quality, shaky footage and screaming really draws the attention away from news as it is not what news is.

Final tasks

8) The introduction of the digital age upon news industries is something that has effected the news values to a great extent. The way in which audiences receive these stories effects every one of the factors that contribute to news story-telling. Things like, immediacy has become irrelevant (to a somewhat large extent). This is because as soon as news is broken by a citizen, social media and the WWW all con tribute to help deliver this piece to as many audiences as possible and it generally comes across really fast. Audiences don't have to look for news, news will be given to them like that.

9) Immediacy- news no longer creates the sense of 'need' amongst audience member. The internet has taken that immediate need away, and whenever there is a news story to be consumed, it will find its way to the audience.

Unambiguity- citizen journalism has created the sense of 'the unknown'. We don't quite understand what's going on and why we are being shown this, it is a story that is kept (often) behind closed doors and creates a sense of anonymous[sy]. 

Balance- Often when a  news story is to be told, their is a twist and a turn to which and how the story is told. It isn't the original core story and therefore has been mediated to a large extent. Now, thanks to the internet, we have the audiences to argue this change. They may know the bitter truth that audiences are hiding through their titles, their wording or even their views. The digital era has opened to doors for the audiences to fight back and they are no longer passive. 

NDM News: Citizen journalism and hyper-reality

1) Notes-

• examples

The news had dominated its stories at the time, it would create news and deliver it to a passive audience to consume and believe. Now, due to the rise of technology, audience members are no longer passive to news, but creating their own form of content. Audience have become the users, and the users have become the publishers. We are now in the era where UGC has now eroded the dominance of institution over audience members.

• theory (audience reception etc.) 

Receptive audience= an audience member that receives and consumes the news without having their own opinion and believing what is being shown to them
UGC= content created by audience members and spread around to the public, becoming creators of news content.

• benefits to institutions 

Institutions have news given to them rather having to pay journalists to go out and collect news stories. This is because it takes a great effort to go out and find stories that will entertain the audience, and so UGC has had a good impact in that regard. They can use the content that society has submitted and use that as their news story. 

• benefits to audience 

Audience members can now have  a more trust worthy source as majority of UGC content is not been mediated in any way. Meaning that it hasn't been edited to show one side of the argument like typical news channels/papers are.

2) What is meant by the term ‘citizen journalist’?

Citizen journalist is someone who is not doing journalism as a career, and rather captures news/evidence in public and submits it for the whole world to see. The difference is, is that it is the public who do citizen journalism as anyone present at an event can capture moments and key details that can draw up concern for the government such as racism caught on streets etc.

3) What was one of the first examples of news being generated by ‘ordinary people’?

The Rodney King case of 1991. This was when a speeder was caught by police and beaten (he was an African American), and the event was captured by a onlooker who recorded this event and published it to the world. This had sparked a lot of evidence of police brutality and is one of the most iconic citizen journalism ever.

4) List some of the formats for participation that are now offered by news organisations.

• Comments 
• Message boards

5) What is one of the main differences between professionally shot footage and that taken first-hand (UGC)?

One of the main difference between professionally shot footage and UGC journalism, is the quality. This is because those who capture footage don't think about the smooth shots, they want to capture the moment as it is happening and at times, expresses their emotions. For example, shaky footage can show horror and being scared through the movement of the camera. In addition, professionally shot footage have a lot of smooth shots and generally has a presenter talking to the audience/news presenters to give context to what is being shown.


6) What is a gatekeeper?

A gatekeeper is someone who is in an organisation (preferably a news co-operation) who decides whether or not to publish a form of news that they have seen as well as preventing certain things to be broadcasted. They essentially prevent certain news, regardless of their content, to be viewed by audiences as they have other news that they deem to be more important.

7) How has the role of a gatekeeper changed?

Independent media on the web is the way to go around gate keepers. This is a system where UGC can be submitted and it can reach a niche audience, and often people who before thought they didn't have a voice, to now feel as if they do. 

8) What is one of the primary concerns held by journalists over the rise of UGC?

One of the primary concerns that journalists have over the rise in UGC content is that news corporations may decide to rely on citizen journalists to do the stories for them, as they don't have to pay them for their work, and it will cut down their costs. Journalists are afraid that their jobs may no longer exist as there are people doing their jobs for them.  

9) Offer your own opinion (critical autonomy) on the following:

What impact is new/digital media having on:

• news stories

A wider variety of news is available than ever before. People are not restricted to a few pages of content, like traditional news papers did. They can see a whole range of stories and ones that are of best interest to the reader.

• the news agenda (the choice of stories that make up the news)

It is having a major impact on the news agenda. This is because online sites such as Twitter and Facebook may own a 'hot' news story that one of their users have broken out. This will become the 'hot' topic of the week, and it will influence news companies to get hold of that information and attempt to do their own news coverage in order to gain more readers.

• the role of professionals in news

NDM is having more of a negative impact on professionals. This is because the internet allows their content to be published and shared around for free, and they are not getting paid for the work they done. This will appose a threat to this job position as the company wants to survive and to do so, they must cut down their costs such as employees.

Hyper-reality and the digital renaissance:

1) The article was written in 2009. Offer three examples of more recent social networking sites or uses of technology that support the idea of a 'digital renaissance'.

• Snapchat
• Instagram
• Twitter

These three examples support the idea of the digital renaissance as users have the ability to communicate and interact with people of different cultures and they also develop their perception of cultures and society in the developed world. This is because, on these sites, users can create there own perception on how they want to be viewed online.

2) How do live streaming services such as Periscope or Facebook Live fit into the idea of a 'digital renaissance'? Are these a force for good or simply a further blurring of reality?

This is more of reality than anything else. This is because the apps and services mentioned all have a key feature; being live. This means that what people see, is the reality of what is actually happening and there is very little, if any' editing actually being presented. This is the difference that videos and these services have different. Services such as FB Live are showing the reality whereas videos have been edited and are not showing the reality of it.

3) How can we link the 'digital renaissance' to our case study on news? Is citizen journalism a further example of hyper-reality or is it actually making news more accurate and closer to real life?

Citizen journalism if anything, is making us a viewers/audience becoming closer to real life than ever before. Yes, to an extent the footage captured can be showing one side of the argument, however it is content which the viewer can relate to. It expresses the emotions which current news doesn't have, which is why news needs to be changed. It needs to feel more like 'news'. News is information that is informing the viewer on events and real life issues, however they need to express emotions and power, which is why news isn't as effective as it doesn't succeed in that prospect. Citizen journalism can really change the way news comes across the the audience/viewer. 

Lessons to be learned as the Buenos Aires Herald goes weekly

Source: https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/oct/26/lessons-to-be-learned-as-the-buenos-aires-herald-goes-weekly

This looks into how Buenos Aires Herald are now firing full time journalists because of their struggle to stay on as a successful newspaper. They have changed from a daily to a weekly distributed platform. 

• “as many as 2,000 journalists may lose their jobs in the country in 2016, a staggering number which will damage the profession greatly”

This could indicate that online news outlets have been preferred over the print platform because of its ease of access. Although it has made it more accessible, it has sacrificed the jobs of journalists which could also look into the negative impacts of New Digital Media.

Local newspaper content too full of listicles and clickbait - lecturer

https://www.theguardian.com/media/greenslade/2016/oct/26/local-newspaper-content-too-full-of-listicles-and-clickbait-lecturer

This article would look into how journalism isn't gaining the credibility it used to. in this case it would instead look at the "listicles" that have been produced as well as more user generated content that wouldn't really "offer any news values". This would indicate a decline in quality with journalism.

I would agree with this article as lately "listicles" have been appearing more frequently in articles and with the click bait that also makes the content even worse. As well as that, the credibility of journalism is also declining which can also show the change in quality over the years.