Ordinary News Journalism involves simply telling the news, and is determined by what the public want to know about, which is known as the 'news agenda'. Investigative Journalism on the other hand involves going off the agenda and deciding for yourself what people want to know and hear about.
An example of this sort of journalism is BBC Panorama where they try and uncover stories which can create an agenda of their own, as they subsequently become topical because of the show.
Journalist's must consider six key points when publishing an investigative piece of journalism. They are as follows;
(1) Be sure of your witnesses;
Always make sure your witnesses are available to give evidence if you need them to. Make sure they are alive, awake and in the country!
(2) Make sure your witnesses are willing to give evidence;
Make sure you are 100% certain that your witnesses will turn up in court if they are needed.
(3) The standing of your witnesses;
It is widely accepted that an upstanding member of society such as a Nurse or a Police Officer will offer more support in court than a ex-convict street sweeper.
(4) Signed Statements;
Investigative journalist's should ensure that they get a signed witness statement from the time and has it clearly signed.
(5) Be cautious of photocopied documents;
It is always best to use the original and you may have to prove in court that your copy is authentic otherwise.
(6) Ensure you keep all evidence;
Journalist's are expected to always be able to prove their facts in court, so they must keep shorthand notes at all time and not dispose of rushes.
Saturday 12 November 2011
Sunday 6 November 2011
Media Law-Confidentiality and Privacy
Confidentiality is at the moment an incredibly hot topic in the media. There has been a large number of high profile cases in which confidentiality has been breached by journalist’s in recent times which increases the importance of Journalist's knowing these laws inside out.
When reporting on something personal it is vital to remember article eight; 'Everybody has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.'
Confidentiality depends on the type of secret information concerned (e.g official secrets is different to hearsay), as well as the expectation of the person passing on the information that it will be kept secret.
For something to be deemed secret information officially it has to have the necessary quality of confidence (i.e. not a rumour from a stranger), was gained in circumstances that both parties would understand that it should be kept secret (i.e. in a meeting with a doctor but not at a party or in a pub), no permission was given to pass on the secret and that harm would come to the person passing on the secret if it became public. It is important to remember that all of these four points have to be there for something to legally deemed 'confidential'.
Confidentiality laws can only be broken if the secret is in the public interest, and when a journalist is thinking about what is in the public interest they have to be careful to define what is in the public's interest-and not what is just of interest to the public.
'Public interest' is only a defence if the article has involved;
-Detecting or exposing crime, or serious impropriety.
-Protecting public health and safety
-Preventing the public from being mislead by an action or a statement of an individual or organisation.
The Public Interest is a buzz-word for tabloid newspapers particularly in celebrity journalism.
It was that final public interest item that was used a defence for the exposure of Ryan Giggs as a love cheat. It came out in the press that Ryan Giggs, a world famous footballer who was married with kids, had been involved in a sex scandal involving a model, as well as the wife or his own brother. Giggs complained that he had a right to privacy, that had been breached by the news stories. But the judge deemed that the public had been mislead in the past as Giggs was presented as a role model, and Giggs had consequently lost his right to privacy.
However it is important to remember that public interest isn't a valid defence in libel cases, but in privacy cases it is a strong defence.
People also have a right to confidentiality when being pictured. The publisher would need permission to use a picture of someone in their journalism safely. This consent can be either Explicit which is the written form of consent, or Implicit which is where the person is aware the picture is being taken.
When reporting on something personal it is vital to remember article eight; 'Everybody has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.'
Confidentiality depends on the type of secret information concerned (e.g official secrets is different to hearsay), as well as the expectation of the person passing on the information that it will be kept secret.
For something to be deemed secret information officially it has to have the necessary quality of confidence (i.e. not a rumour from a stranger), was gained in circumstances that both parties would understand that it should be kept secret (i.e. in a meeting with a doctor but not at a party or in a pub), no permission was given to pass on the secret and that harm would come to the person passing on the secret if it became public. It is important to remember that all of these four points have to be there for something to legally deemed 'confidential'.
Confidentiality laws can only be broken if the secret is in the public interest, and when a journalist is thinking about what is in the public interest they have to be careful to define what is in the public's interest-and not what is just of interest to the public.
'Public interest' is only a defence if the article has involved;
-Detecting or exposing crime, or serious impropriety.
-Protecting public health and safety
-Preventing the public from being mislead by an action or a statement of an individual or organisation.
The Public Interest is a buzz-word for tabloid newspapers particularly in celebrity journalism.
It was that final public interest item that was used a defence for the exposure of Ryan Giggs as a love cheat. It came out in the press that Ryan Giggs, a world famous footballer who was married with kids, had been involved in a sex scandal involving a model, as well as the wife or his own brother. Giggs complained that he had a right to privacy, that had been breached by the news stories. But the judge deemed that the public had been mislead in the past as Giggs was presented as a role model, and Giggs had consequently lost his right to privacy.
However it is important to remember that public interest isn't a valid defence in libel cases, but in privacy cases it is a strong defence.
People also have a right to confidentiality when being pictured. The publisher would need permission to use a picture of someone in their journalism safely. This consent can be either Explicit which is the written form of consent, or Implicit which is where the person is aware the picture is being taken.
Saturday 29 October 2011
Copyright-Without it we're nothing!
Everybody has the right not to have their work stolen, be it a Construction worker, an inventor or a journalist the copyright law stays the same.
In a nut-shell, copyright in common law is the act of stealing somebodies intellectual work without their permission. And if caught 'stealing' work you can face being sued by a claimant for loss of earnings or even potential loss of earnings.
'Reproduction of a substantial part of a copyright work may constitute infringment. Whether the part of a copyright work which is copied is a substantial part may depend as much on the quality of what is reproduced as on the quantity (Sweeney vs Macmillan Publishers Ltd [2001] A11 ER (D) 332 (Nov))'.
Copyright Law's enable journalist's to make money, and potentially make a career out of journalism. Therefore it is incredibly important that journalist's make their work safe from copyright infringements.
I remember one of those first things I learnt on this BA Journalism course is that 'Journalism is the practise of turning information into money'. However information alone of course isn't worth an awful lot until its turned into something material, for example the wood that a carpenter uses to make a wardrobe isn't worth as much as it is when it becomes a wardrobe. And in the same way information isn't worth much alone until it is turned into news by journalist's.
Any work that you do is your property until you sell it to someone else. However usually if you are employed by someone else the work you do is their property, and you in return get paid a wage by them. You effectively surrender the rights to your work when you accept any sort of wage for it, but morally you still have rights. For example you have the right for your work not to be tampered and interfered with, and all of your work should be accredited to you.
However for work to be protected by copyright it must have had some sort of hard work or effort put into it. Brief slogans and catchphrases aren't protected. So in relation to some of my own work for Winol; my package on the lecturer strikes would be protected by copyright as I put the effort into getting the interviews and doing the filming myself. However my catch-phrase 'he's hit the Winol woodwork' in my sports feature would not be protected as it is too trivial.
However in Journalism it is sometimes possible to use other peoples work without paying for it or having explicit permission. iThis is called 'fair dealing'. This enables you to use other peoples work for 'review and criticism', private research, and reporting current events and covers you in the case of incidental inclusion. But all of this must be properly accredited to its author.
In a nut-shell, copyright in common law is the act of stealing somebodies intellectual work without their permission. And if caught 'stealing' work you can face being sued by a claimant for loss of earnings or even potential loss of earnings.
'Reproduction of a substantial part of a copyright work may constitute infringment. Whether the part of a copyright work which is copied is a substantial part may depend as much on the quality of what is reproduced as on the quantity (Sweeney vs Macmillan Publishers Ltd [2001] A11 ER (D) 332 (Nov))'.
Copyright Law's enable journalist's to make money, and potentially make a career out of journalism. Therefore it is incredibly important that journalist's make their work safe from copyright infringements.
I remember one of those first things I learnt on this BA Journalism course is that 'Journalism is the practise of turning information into money'. However information alone of course isn't worth an awful lot until its turned into something material, for example the wood that a carpenter uses to make a wardrobe isn't worth as much as it is when it becomes a wardrobe. And in the same way information isn't worth much alone until it is turned into news by journalist's.
Any work that you do is your property until you sell it to someone else. However usually if you are employed by someone else the work you do is their property, and you in return get paid a wage by them. You effectively surrender the rights to your work when you accept any sort of wage for it, but morally you still have rights. For example you have the right for your work not to be tampered and interfered with, and all of your work should be accredited to you.
However for work to be protected by copyright it must have had some sort of hard work or effort put into it. Brief slogans and catchphrases aren't protected. So in relation to some of my own work for Winol; my package on the lecturer strikes would be protected by copyright as I put the effort into getting the interviews and doing the filming myself. However my catch-phrase 'he's hit the Winol woodwork' in my sports feature would not be protected as it is too trivial.
However in Journalism it is sometimes possible to use other peoples work without paying for it or having explicit permission. iThis is called 'fair dealing'. This enables you to use other peoples work for 'review and criticism', private research, and reporting current events and covers you in the case of incidental inclusion. But all of this must be properly accredited to its author.
Sunday 23 October 2011
Qualified Privilege
Qualified Privilege is to a journalist what a scrum hat is to a second rower in Rugby. It gives them the protection they need to peform at the peak of their game. However for players to jutify wearing them, they have to be brave and play well, just as journalist's have to be FAST, ACCURATE and FAIR with immediate publication and with no errors or malice.
In its purest form qualified privelege means exemption from the law, which is something that judges have while they are within a courtroom. The Queen is an example of somebody who constantly posseses qualified privelege-as she is above the law. If the Queen decided to kill someone it wouldn't be classed as murder, but she doesn't scare me much!
If you are to publish something defamatory about someone, you need a defence to avoid legal action against you.
One of the main defences is 'Justification'. This essentially means that if you can prove something is true you can't lose. For example the Newspapapers that posted stories about Ryan Giggs being a love cheat were in the clear, because they could prove it was true, despite Giggs claming privacy.
Another key defense for journalist's is that of 'Comment'. This means that you have the freedom to defame someone if it is written in such a way that it clearly written as opinion and not as fact. For example insulting a television personality in a feature piece in a broadsheet is OK, as it is recognised as comment.
The key thing to remember as a journalist though when reporting on something which may be deemed defamatory is to ensure that what you report on is in the public interest.
Public Interest is argued in a legal case to justify information being published. (McNae, 2009). It is important to understand the difference between the genuine public interest (i.e protecting the safety of the public, exposing crime, and preventing the public from being mislead by an important figure)and news which may be of great interest to the public but is essentially tittle tattle (most obvious within 'kiss and tell stories'.
Journalist's are strongly advised to abide to the 10 point test of media law, so its only right that I put them on my blog!
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) The nature of information
3) The source of information
4) The steps taken to verify of the matter
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was sought from the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication
When reporting news, you will almost always stay on the safe side as long as you abide to the above 10 points and are fast, accurate and fair in doing so.
In its purest form qualified privelege means exemption from the law, which is something that judges have while they are within a courtroom. The Queen is an example of somebody who constantly posseses qualified privelege-as she is above the law. If the Queen decided to kill someone it wouldn't be classed as murder, but she doesn't scare me much!
If you are to publish something defamatory about someone, you need a defence to avoid legal action against you.
One of the main defences is 'Justification'. This essentially means that if you can prove something is true you can't lose. For example the Newspapapers that posted stories about Ryan Giggs being a love cheat were in the clear, because they could prove it was true, despite Giggs claming privacy.
Another key defense for journalist's is that of 'Comment'. This means that you have the freedom to defame someone if it is written in such a way that it clearly written as opinion and not as fact. For example insulting a television personality in a feature piece in a broadsheet is OK, as it is recognised as comment.
The key thing to remember as a journalist though when reporting on something which may be deemed defamatory is to ensure that what you report on is in the public interest.
Public Interest is argued in a legal case to justify information being published. (McNae, 2009). It is important to understand the difference between the genuine public interest (i.e protecting the safety of the public, exposing crime, and preventing the public from being mislead by an important figure)and news which may be of great interest to the public but is essentially tittle tattle (most obvious within 'kiss and tell stories'.
Journalist's are strongly advised to abide to the 10 point test of media law, so its only right that I put them on my blog!
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) The nature of information
3) The source of information
4) The steps taken to verify of the matter
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was sought from the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication
When reporting news, you will almost always stay on the safe side as long as you abide to the above 10 points and are fast, accurate and fair in doing so.
Wednesday 19 October 2011
Defamation and Libel
Everyone has the right to their reputation. Your reputation is made up facts about you; such as your qualifications, and your bodily statistics. The rest of your reputation is made up of the opinions of people who have met you, such as your lecturers and teachers. If you defame somebody you can face being sued, and there has been a large number of high profile cases over the years, where libel victims have sued newspapers for thousands of pounds.
A statement is defamatory if it does any of the following things;
Lowers the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking people
Causes them to be shunned or avoided
Disparages them in their business, trade or profession
Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.
However Defamation is only one of the aspects of a Libel case. The defamatory statement also has to be published, (written down, or in video). To officially be defamation it is has to have been communicated to at least one other person, which of course in journalism isn't particularly hard to prove as publication is so widespread. The claimant also has to be identified so far that a reasonable person would recognise that he or she is being referred to.
It is important to recognise that in court the claimant doesn't have to prove that the statement is false, as this is already assumed. Journalists have a defence if the statement is true and they can prove that it’s true.
The 'Reynolds Defence' can protect a publisher in some circumstances, when the untrue statement is in the public interest. The Reynolds defence aka 'The Ten Point Test is as follows;
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) Nature of Information
3) Source of Information
4) The steps taken to verify the information
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was saught by the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication
If all of these points are met you can use this as a defence.
A Libel case that has been in the news recently is that of Morrissey. He is claming that he was defamed in 2007 by the music magazine NME where they deliberately twisted his words, and made him seem racist. If true this is clearly defamatory because a public figure is being made out to be a racist could lead to him being exposed to hatred, ridicule or contempt and generally lowers him in the eyes of a right-thinking member of society. The defence claim that there is no evidence to show that Morrissey’s reputation was harmed by the publication.
This case highlights how complex Libel Law's are and proves that you should always take measures to ensure you are not defaming somebody in your work as you can be sued for a lot of money and it can be very harmful to your own career.
A statement is defamatory if it does any of the following things;
Lowers the claimant in the estimation of right-thinking people
Causes them to be shunned or avoided
Disparages them in their business, trade or profession
Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt.
However Defamation is only one of the aspects of a Libel case. The defamatory statement also has to be published, (written down, or in video). To officially be defamation it is has to have been communicated to at least one other person, which of course in journalism isn't particularly hard to prove as publication is so widespread. The claimant also has to be identified so far that a reasonable person would recognise that he or she is being referred to.
It is important to recognise that in court the claimant doesn't have to prove that the statement is false, as this is already assumed. Journalists have a defence if the statement is true and they can prove that it’s true.
The 'Reynolds Defence' can protect a publisher in some circumstances, when the untrue statement is in the public interest. The Reynolds defence aka 'The Ten Point Test is as follows;
1) Seriousness of the allegation
2) Nature of Information
3) Source of Information
4) The steps taken to verify the information
5) The status of information
6) The urgency of the matter
7) Whether comment was saught by the claimant
8) Whether the article contained the gist of the claimant's side of the story
9) The tone of the article
10) The circumstances of the publication
If all of these points are met you can use this as a defence.
A Libel case that has been in the news recently is that of Morrissey. He is claming that he was defamed in 2007 by the music magazine NME where they deliberately twisted his words, and made him seem racist. If true this is clearly defamatory because a public figure is being made out to be a racist could lead to him being exposed to hatred, ridicule or contempt and generally lowers him in the eyes of a right-thinking member of society. The defence claim that there is no evidence to show that Morrissey’s reputation was harmed by the publication.
This case highlights how complex Libel Law's are and proves that you should always take measures to ensure you are not defaming somebody in your work as you can be sued for a lot of money and it can be very harmful to your own career.
Thursday 13 October 2011
Law Lecture notes-week 2
How to react to a Crime Story unfolding
When reporting on crime you must always be aware of the risks involved. The main risks are that of Prejudice and Contempt. Prejudice within crime reporting could be judging somebody before a trial, which can contaminate their chances of a fair trial, which can lead to contempt of court.
The time when you are most at risk is when the there has been an arrest made, which is when the case becomes legally active.
During this time you are very limited as to what you can report on. These are as follows:
-Names of defendants, ages, addresses and occupations
-Charges faced or a close summary
-Name of court and magistrates names
-Names of solicitor's or Barrister's present
-Date and place to where case is adjourned
-Any arrangements as to bail
-Whether legal aid was granted.
Cases such as family disputes and motoring offences can be handled in a magistrates court. Magistrates have the power to jail an offender for up to six months, and can hand out fines of up to £5,000. They also have the power to give offenders community orders and ASBO's.
Key stages of a trial
-prosecution opening
-key prosecution witnesses
-defence opening
-key defence witnesses
-Judge's summing up
-Jury sent out, deliberation and verdict
-Sentencing
The main rules of court reporting are that the reports are fair, accurate, contemporaneous and that there is no recording during the trial.
When reporting on crime you must always be aware of the risks involved. The main risks are that of Prejudice and Contempt. Prejudice within crime reporting could be judging somebody before a trial, which can contaminate their chances of a fair trial, which can lead to contempt of court.
The time when you are most at risk is when the there has been an arrest made, which is when the case becomes legally active.
During this time you are very limited as to what you can report on. These are as follows:
-Names of defendants, ages, addresses and occupations
-Charges faced or a close summary
-Name of court and magistrates names
-Names of solicitor's or Barrister's present
-Date and place to where case is adjourned
-Any arrangements as to bail
-Whether legal aid was granted.
Cases such as family disputes and motoring offences can be handled in a magistrates court. Magistrates have the power to jail an offender for up to six months, and can hand out fines of up to £5,000. They also have the power to give offenders community orders and ASBO's.
Key stages of a trial
-prosecution opening
-key prosecution witnesses
-defence opening
-key defence witnesses
-Judge's summing up
-Jury sent out, deliberation and verdict
-Sentencing
The main rules of court reporting are that the reports are fair, accurate, contemporaneous and that there is no recording during the trial.
Thursday 12 May 2011
Tractatus-Seminar Paper
Tractatus
Tractatus was written by Ludwig Wittgenstein whilst he was a soldier and a prisoner of during the First World War.
The central theme of Tractatus is the relationship between language, thought and reality. Wittgenstein insisted that language is the perceptible form of thought, bound to reality by a common logical form. It was also concerned with defining the limits of science.
Unlike most of the philosophical literature we have studied this year, Tractatus doesn’t really contain any arguments, rather statements which Wittgenstein deems to be self-evident. This is largely because of the ‘Verification Principle’ which it employs. The Verification Principle forwards that if a proposition cannot be verified-it is pointless, and therefore, the Tractatus doesn’t waste time on things which can’t be verified. Consequently it is a very analytical philosophy, and assumes that ‘language is everything’, and ‘everything is language’.
So while many of the literature we’ve looked at encourage us to think ‘outside the box’, Tractatus attempts to limit thinking altogether. My use of a cliché already would have angered Wittgenstein!
Wittgenstein was heavily influenced by the works of Bertrand Russell, whose ideas were largely aimed at trying to overcome philosophical scepticism which is the idea that we don’t know anything. In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein tries to create a way in which language and thoughts can be brought together flawlessly.
The Tractatus is written in numbered paragraphs which often contain one short sentence, and is mainly concerned with the relationship between the nature of language and the world as a whole.
Within the Tactatus there are seven main propositions:
1. The world is everything that is the case.
2. What is the case (a fact) is the existence of states of affairs.
3. A logical picture of facts is a thought.
4. A thought is a proposition with sense.
5. A proposition is a truth-function of elementary propositions.
6. The general form of a proposition is the general form of a truth function.
7. Whereof one cannot speak, one must pass over in silence.
The first few pages look at ontology which is effectively what the world is made up of. The Tractatus reads that reality is made up of simple objects combined to form the state of affairs. They can either be something, or not something, regardless of anything else, and the state of affairs combine together to create complex facts.
He then moves onto discuss how the world has the potential to be described accurately because of the way language works. According to Wittgenstein, language consists of propositions that are built from simpler propositions which are made up of names. Language can mirror reality by sharing its logical form, so names mirror objects, basic propositions mirror states of affairs, and propositions mirror the facts. A proposition is essentially a logical picture of reality. They are bound together in a way of which they resemble the reality. For example a painting of a landscape is arranged in a way, which resembles the landscape itself.
A picture can represent a fact by sharing its logical form, but the form cannot be depicted. It isn’t possible to say what the logical form of a proposition or fact is, but the form is visible through the way in which the fact is held together. The coinnections between names and states of affairs show themselves so there is no need for them to be held together by words such as ‘and’. Wittgenstein calls this his ‘fundamental idea’.
In the 4th proposition Wittgenstein touches on how much of philosophy is a product of peoples mis-understanding of language, and he describes many philosophical questions as nonsense, and argues that many deep philosophical problems are not actual problems. To me this seems like a rather existentialist idea, because it critisises the practice of pondering things from the past and thinking of the future. This type of thinking brings no present bodily pleasure, and is essentially pointless. The links with existentialism is also evident in proposition 5, where one of them reads ‘We cannot infer the events of the future from those of the present’. An existentialist would agree with this statement because predictions of the future are meaningless to them as well.
Truth Tables are also introduced in proposition 4. They make light of the idea that we can represent propositions and their truth-conditions without making use of connectives.
According to Wittgenstein there are 3 types of proposition. There are tautologies which are always fact. Contradictions which are always untrue, and propositions with a sense, which can be both true and false.
Wittgenstein assumed the idea that if an argument is valid, it is logically equivalent to the conclusion which can clearly be seen in the truth table.
The last line in the Tractatus, is one I found to be particularly interesting. "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." This reminds me of the saying ‘don’t speak unless you have something interesting and factual to say-something which I have struggled with throughout my life!
He concluded that the work wasn’t of philosophy to live by, but rather a ladder in place to aid in gaining an understanding of the idea that only statements of natural sciences are meaningful.
Tractatus was written by Ludwig Wittgenstein whilst he was a soldier and a prisoner of during the First World War.
The central theme of Tractatus is the relationship between language, thought and reality. Wittgenstein insisted that language is the perceptible form of thought, bound to reality by a common logical form. It was also concerned with defining the limits of science.
Unlike most of the philosophical literature we have studied this year, Tractatus doesn’t really contain any arguments, rather statements which Wittgenstein deems to be self-evident. This is largely because of the ‘Verification Principle’ which it employs. The Verification Principle forwards that if a proposition cannot be verified-it is pointless, and therefore, the Tractatus doesn’t waste time on things which can’t be verified. Consequently it is a very analytical philosophy, and assumes that ‘language is everything’, and ‘everything is language’.
So while many of the literature we’ve looked at encourage us to think ‘outside the box’, Tractatus attempts to limit thinking altogether. My use of a cliché already would have angered Wittgenstein!
Wittgenstein was heavily influenced by the works of Bertrand Russell, whose ideas were largely aimed at trying to overcome philosophical scepticism which is the idea that we don’t know anything. In the Tractatus, Wittgenstein tries to create a way in which language and thoughts can be brought together flawlessly.
The Tractatus is written in numbered paragraphs which often contain one short sentence, and is mainly concerned with the relationship between the nature of language and the world as a whole.
Within the Tactatus there are seven main propositions:
1. The world is everything that is the case.
2. What is the case (a fact) is the existence of states of affairs.
3. A logical picture of facts is a thought.
4. A thought is a proposition with sense.
5. A proposition is a truth-function of elementary propositions.
6. The general form of a proposition is the general form of a truth function.
7. Whereof one cannot speak, one must pass over in silence.
The first few pages look at ontology which is effectively what the world is made up of. The Tractatus reads that reality is made up of simple objects combined to form the state of affairs. They can either be something, or not something, regardless of anything else, and the state of affairs combine together to create complex facts.
He then moves onto discuss how the world has the potential to be described accurately because of the way language works. According to Wittgenstein, language consists of propositions that are built from simpler propositions which are made up of names. Language can mirror reality by sharing its logical form, so names mirror objects, basic propositions mirror states of affairs, and propositions mirror the facts. A proposition is essentially a logical picture of reality. They are bound together in a way of which they resemble the reality. For example a painting of a landscape is arranged in a way, which resembles the landscape itself.
A picture can represent a fact by sharing its logical form, but the form cannot be depicted. It isn’t possible to say what the logical form of a proposition or fact is, but the form is visible through the way in which the fact is held together. The coinnections between names and states of affairs show themselves so there is no need for them to be held together by words such as ‘and’. Wittgenstein calls this his ‘fundamental idea’.
In the 4th proposition Wittgenstein touches on how much of philosophy is a product of peoples mis-understanding of language, and he describes many philosophical questions as nonsense, and argues that many deep philosophical problems are not actual problems. To me this seems like a rather existentialist idea, because it critisises the practice of pondering things from the past and thinking of the future. This type of thinking brings no present bodily pleasure, and is essentially pointless. The links with existentialism is also evident in proposition 5, where one of them reads ‘We cannot infer the events of the future from those of the present’. An existentialist would agree with this statement because predictions of the future are meaningless to them as well.
Truth Tables are also introduced in proposition 4. They make light of the idea that we can represent propositions and their truth-conditions without making use of connectives.
According to Wittgenstein there are 3 types of proposition. There are tautologies which are always fact. Contradictions which are always untrue, and propositions with a sense, which can be both true and false.
Wittgenstein assumed the idea that if an argument is valid, it is logically equivalent to the conclusion which can clearly be seen in the truth table.
The last line in the Tractatus, is one I found to be particularly interesting. "Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent." This reminds me of the saying ‘don’t speak unless you have something interesting and factual to say-something which I have struggled with throughout my life!
He concluded that the work wasn’t of philosophy to live by, but rather a ladder in place to aid in gaining an understanding of the idea that only statements of natural sciences are meaningful.
Sunday 24 April 2011
The Outsider
The Outsider
The Outsider is a cracking read, and made for an interesting seminar.
The main character in the book is called Meursault, an existentialist man who appears to only exist through sensory experience.
Existentialism cares only for the here and now, and isn’t worried about the past and feels no emotions of guilt or conscience, simply because they were solely living for the moment. The novel looks at the behaviour of a person who lives with the existentialist view that it is the decisions we make shape the characters we are.
The novel doesn’t mention time at any point, as time doesn’t matter to existentialists as they are just living for the present. The main idea’s of existentialism are shown through the novel through it being written in the ‘here and present’.
From a relatively normal person’s perspective, the behaviour of the speaker can not only be frustrating but shocking. The way he drinks coffee while in the presence of his recently deceased mother makes the reader question whether he understands social normality, but in truth it is just the typical existentialist way.
The behaviour of Meursault and the existentialism within the novel reminds me of some friends of mine who claimed to be ‘living the dream’ last summer. They would spend the entire time looking for pleasure, be it drinking tea and eating expensive food during the day, or smoking marijuana on the beach at night. They were simply living life solely for personal enjoyment, and lost their grasp of social normality, and weren’t at all bothered about it.
They could make quite wonderful company, but eventually paid for their behaviour when getting to University and having to live within (nearly) normality.
Just like my friends, Meursault eventually paid for being a free-thinking man, and was put to death-not because of the crime itself, but because of his attitude and unusual behaviour.
The Outsider is a cracking read, and made for an interesting seminar.
The main character in the book is called Meursault, an existentialist man who appears to only exist through sensory experience.
Existentialism cares only for the here and now, and isn’t worried about the past and feels no emotions of guilt or conscience, simply because they were solely living for the moment. The novel looks at the behaviour of a person who lives with the existentialist view that it is the decisions we make shape the characters we are.
The novel doesn’t mention time at any point, as time doesn’t matter to existentialists as they are just living for the present. The main idea’s of existentialism are shown through the novel through it being written in the ‘here and present’.
From a relatively normal person’s perspective, the behaviour of the speaker can not only be frustrating but shocking. The way he drinks coffee while in the presence of his recently deceased mother makes the reader question whether he understands social normality, but in truth it is just the typical existentialist way.
The behaviour of Meursault and the existentialism within the novel reminds me of some friends of mine who claimed to be ‘living the dream’ last summer. They would spend the entire time looking for pleasure, be it drinking tea and eating expensive food during the day, or smoking marijuana on the beach at night. They were simply living life solely for personal enjoyment, and lost their grasp of social normality, and weren’t at all bothered about it.
They could make quite wonderful company, but eventually paid for their behaviour when getting to University and having to live within (nearly) normality.
Just like my friends, Meursault eventually paid for being a free-thinking man, and was put to death-not because of the crime itself, but because of his attitude and unusual behaviour.
Tuesday 29 March 2011
Winol Notes-Term 2
Winol Review Term 2
Just thought I’d blog up my notes from this week’s work on WINOl to help me with my critical analysis.
Week 1:
In the first week of the second term, myself and other senior members of the sports desk decided to go ahead with a normal ‘sportsweek’ bulletin, while the news team went ahead with a ‘dummy run’.
My job was to go and film Winchester City in two games in 3 days, and do a football highlights ‘double package’.
The camera work for the first goal in the first game was poor, but I put this down to being out of practise with the zoom.
The scripting was good and I was praised by my editor as well as the sports team for it. However my voice-over sounded very echoey, which ruined the package audibly. I was advised on where is best to do voice-overs, and I never had the same problem again this term.
I think the footage of the second game was particularly good, and the as-live commentary by Will Cooper added a bit of feel to the piece, as it was a dramatic game to be covering. I also captured the club owner running onto the pitch, which made the footage seem more exciting, and we used the clip in the opening sequence.
I also did an as-live commentary for Aimee’s Eastleigh package, which is was quite pleased with as I thought it helped capture the moment and give the package a more professional feel.
Week 2:
In week 2 I had a more behind the scenes role, helping the less experienced members of the team with their packages.
I also did an ‘as-live’ commentary for Gareth’s Basingstoke vs Eastleigh package, which I was pretty pleased with, and I was careful not to pre-empt what was going to happen.
However the snippets of as-live apparently appeared to be too pre-rehearsed, and we were told to try and make them sound more natural in future, perhaps by being unsure of exactly what was happening.
In week 2 I also chose the bedding music for Gareth’s ‘potted history’ piece. I found the rights-free on garage band and I think it complimented the piece rather well.
Week 3:
I took this advice on board in the third week, where once again I did some as-live commentary. I helped Will filming the Eastleigh double package, before helping him with the scripting, which made me easier for me to employ the as-live commentary.
During this week I also worked alongside Aimee Pickering making a new opening sequence for Sportsweek. This entailed finding pieces of footage which we felt gave the right atmosphere for the show, as well as clips of some of the most impressive footage we’ve filmed. We used slow motion to emphasise some of the shots. I chose the music off Garage Band, as it is free of copyright and I felt that it was suitable for a sports show, and worked well with the pictures.
Week 4:
Week 4 was arguably my most productive week, and it included some of my best work of the year so far. The show started with our new opening sequence, which was complimented by lecturers and peers alike.
The opening story of Sportsweek was one that I found myself, using contacts I have within sport at the University. I set up an informal interview with the captain of the University football team, and filmed him the players warming up in the background. This worked well for the piece, but Angus that it wasn’t as tightly cropped as it should have been. I also used GV’s in the piece which I filmed before the game started, which I used over the interview to make it more interesting and easier to watch.
The reason for this being news worthy was because of the size of the game, and the fact history was potentially going to be made.
I also did a tight zoom shot of one of the players to be used in the opening sequence.
I made the conscious decision to not use an as-live commentary in the package, as it is unrealistic that a University sports event would have commentary over it.
I was pleased with my scripting once again, and I was careful not to use too many cliché’s.
The camerawork wasn’t particularly good, but I think I made the best out of a bad filming venue. However I was told by Angus to try and be less clumsy with the zoom option as it looks unprofessional.
I did a rare post-match interview with a player, which was of a very informal tone, which I thought captured the moment brilliantly which is why I used it in the package.
Later on in the show I stood in the studio, and explained the league tables to the camera. I wore smart clothes as this is what would be worn in a professional studio, but I tried to not sound too formal.
I felt this was a success as it looked pretty professional, and also gave another dimension to the show. However if I was to do it again I would try and be more relaxed about it and look less serious. There should have been more banter between myself and the anchor as well, but I thought for the first time of doing the feature it was a reasonable success.
Week 5:
In week 5 I did two football highlights packages.
This involved as usual going to games, filming them, and cutting down the footage into short highlights packages. As usual I was comfortable in writing my scripts and was particularly pleased with them.
However I failed to notice a significant error which I made in the AFC Totton package. Despite knowing the name of the team in question I repeatedly got the name wrong in my voiceover calling ‘Yate Town, ‘Tate Town’.
This is potentially a fatal error as it is factually inaccurate, and if aired this would have been a major problem. However my sports editor found the error, and I came in as soon as I could to help eradicate the problem. We managed to cover up the error, thus saving the package and consequently Sportsweek for week 5.
This was a momentary lapse of concentration, and was an eye-opener, because although I am very confident in writing my scripts, it is pivotal to get other people to look over your work (particularly the editor) before considering a piece of work done.
My second package was another highlights package featuring the university football team. I made a conscious effort to be steady with the zoom, as once again the place I was filming from wasn’t ideal. I was accurate with the script, but was told to make sure I don’t over word them. At times the sentences I was using were too long, and needed to be more ‘phrase-like’.
Week six
This week saw the return of ‘Winol Woodwork’ which I did twice last term with a lot of success. This time we took the camera’s to Basingstoke Town, to film them in the entertaining sports feature. We knew that this would get us a lot of hits for the show as they have a good fan-base, which may have otherwise been lost due to the fact we weren’t covering their game that week.
I altered the Piece to Camera to try and make it more visually interesting, and included footage from previous editions of the feature. Another change was freezing the screen when the players names come up, as feedback had told us that often the straps were coming up and disappearing too quickly. For one reason or another the timings were a little out and the straps came up a little bit too early in the final product.
Just thought I’d blog up my notes from this week’s work on WINOl to help me with my critical analysis.
Week 1:
In the first week of the second term, myself and other senior members of the sports desk decided to go ahead with a normal ‘sportsweek’ bulletin, while the news team went ahead with a ‘dummy run’.
My job was to go and film Winchester City in two games in 3 days, and do a football highlights ‘double package’.
The camera work for the first goal in the first game was poor, but I put this down to being out of practise with the zoom.
The scripting was good and I was praised by my editor as well as the sports team for it. However my voice-over sounded very echoey, which ruined the package audibly. I was advised on where is best to do voice-overs, and I never had the same problem again this term.
I think the footage of the second game was particularly good, and the as-live commentary by Will Cooper added a bit of feel to the piece, as it was a dramatic game to be covering. I also captured the club owner running onto the pitch, which made the footage seem more exciting, and we used the clip in the opening sequence.
I also did an as-live commentary for Aimee’s Eastleigh package, which is was quite pleased with as I thought it helped capture the moment and give the package a more professional feel.
Week 2:
In week 2 I had a more behind the scenes role, helping the less experienced members of the team with their packages.
I also did an ‘as-live’ commentary for Gareth’s Basingstoke vs Eastleigh package, which I was pretty pleased with, and I was careful not to pre-empt what was going to happen.
However the snippets of as-live apparently appeared to be too pre-rehearsed, and we were told to try and make them sound more natural in future, perhaps by being unsure of exactly what was happening.
In week 2 I also chose the bedding music for Gareth’s ‘potted history’ piece. I found the rights-free on garage band and I think it complimented the piece rather well.
Week 3:
I took this advice on board in the third week, where once again I did some as-live commentary. I helped Will filming the Eastleigh double package, before helping him with the scripting, which made me easier for me to employ the as-live commentary.
During this week I also worked alongside Aimee Pickering making a new opening sequence for Sportsweek. This entailed finding pieces of footage which we felt gave the right atmosphere for the show, as well as clips of some of the most impressive footage we’ve filmed. We used slow motion to emphasise some of the shots. I chose the music off Garage Band, as it is free of copyright and I felt that it was suitable for a sports show, and worked well with the pictures.
Week 4:
Week 4 was arguably my most productive week, and it included some of my best work of the year so far. The show started with our new opening sequence, which was complimented by lecturers and peers alike.
The opening story of Sportsweek was one that I found myself, using contacts I have within sport at the University. I set up an informal interview with the captain of the University football team, and filmed him the players warming up in the background. This worked well for the piece, but Angus that it wasn’t as tightly cropped as it should have been. I also used GV’s in the piece which I filmed before the game started, which I used over the interview to make it more interesting and easier to watch.
The reason for this being news worthy was because of the size of the game, and the fact history was potentially going to be made.
I also did a tight zoom shot of one of the players to be used in the opening sequence.
I made the conscious decision to not use an as-live commentary in the package, as it is unrealistic that a University sports event would have commentary over it.
I was pleased with my scripting once again, and I was careful not to use too many cliché’s.
The camerawork wasn’t particularly good, but I think I made the best out of a bad filming venue. However I was told by Angus to try and be less clumsy with the zoom option as it looks unprofessional.
I did a rare post-match interview with a player, which was of a very informal tone, which I thought captured the moment brilliantly which is why I used it in the package.
Later on in the show I stood in the studio, and explained the league tables to the camera. I wore smart clothes as this is what would be worn in a professional studio, but I tried to not sound too formal.
I felt this was a success as it looked pretty professional, and also gave another dimension to the show. However if I was to do it again I would try and be more relaxed about it and look less serious. There should have been more banter between myself and the anchor as well, but I thought for the first time of doing the feature it was a reasonable success.
Week 5:
In week 5 I did two football highlights packages.
This involved as usual going to games, filming them, and cutting down the footage into short highlights packages. As usual I was comfortable in writing my scripts and was particularly pleased with them.
However I failed to notice a significant error which I made in the AFC Totton package. Despite knowing the name of the team in question I repeatedly got the name wrong in my voiceover calling ‘Yate Town, ‘Tate Town’.
This is potentially a fatal error as it is factually inaccurate, and if aired this would have been a major problem. However my sports editor found the error, and I came in as soon as I could to help eradicate the problem. We managed to cover up the error, thus saving the package and consequently Sportsweek for week 5.
This was a momentary lapse of concentration, and was an eye-opener, because although I am very confident in writing my scripts, it is pivotal to get other people to look over your work (particularly the editor) before considering a piece of work done.
My second package was another highlights package featuring the university football team. I made a conscious effort to be steady with the zoom, as once again the place I was filming from wasn’t ideal. I was accurate with the script, but was told to make sure I don’t over word them. At times the sentences I was using were too long, and needed to be more ‘phrase-like’.
Week six
This week saw the return of ‘Winol Woodwork’ which I did twice last term with a lot of success. This time we took the camera’s to Basingstoke Town, to film them in the entertaining sports feature. We knew that this would get us a lot of hits for the show as they have a good fan-base, which may have otherwise been lost due to the fact we weren’t covering their game that week.
I altered the Piece to Camera to try and make it more visually interesting, and included footage from previous editions of the feature. Another change was freezing the screen when the players names come up, as feedback had told us that often the straps were coming up and disappearing too quickly. For one reason or another the timings were a little out and the straps came up a little bit too early in the final product.
Tuesday 15 March 2011
HCJ-Economics notes
HCJ
Economics
Economics analyses the production, distribution and consumption of goods, whilst explaining how economies work.
An economist would argue that money is the controlling force of the universe.
Adam Smith
Adam Smith believed in the utility theory, in which people make money as a means of boosting their own personal utility.-Utility being the measurement of money.
He believed that the self-interest was the main driving motive behind economics, and strongly argued that each person should be free to maximise their potential financially. And that state policies should be in order to maximise ones wealth.
Keynes
The main idea within Keynesian economics is that of ‘supply creating its own demand’.
Keynes attempted to develop a theory that would explain what determines saving, consumption, investment and production. In that theory, the interaction of aggregate demand and aggregate supply determines the level of output and employment in the economy.
Keynes was massively against over-saving and would encourage a society where people spend what they earn, similarly to that of Gordon Brown’s government. This is because, saving money cuts the demand.
He would argue that society should keep supplying, and keep demanding. He assumed that extra spending allows businesses enough money to hire more people and pay them, which in turn allows a further increase in consumer spending. This is because society can’t absorb profit.
A country where this theory appears to be strongly opposed is China, where government spending is kept at a minimum. In China spending is frowned upon, and the money is just collected and not spent. This means that there is not enough money to consume.
Economics
Economics analyses the production, distribution and consumption of goods, whilst explaining how economies work.
An economist would argue that money is the controlling force of the universe.
Adam Smith
Adam Smith believed in the utility theory, in which people make money as a means of boosting their own personal utility.-Utility being the measurement of money.
He believed that the self-interest was the main driving motive behind economics, and strongly argued that each person should be free to maximise their potential financially. And that state policies should be in order to maximise ones wealth.
Keynes
The main idea within Keynesian economics is that of ‘supply creating its own demand’.
Keynes attempted to develop a theory that would explain what determines saving, consumption, investment and production. In that theory, the interaction of aggregate demand and aggregate supply determines the level of output and employment in the economy.
Keynes was massively against over-saving and would encourage a society where people spend what they earn, similarly to that of Gordon Brown’s government. This is because, saving money cuts the demand.
He would argue that society should keep supplying, and keep demanding. He assumed that extra spending allows businesses enough money to hire more people and pay them, which in turn allows a further increase in consumer spending. This is because society can’t absorb profit.
A country where this theory appears to be strongly opposed is China, where government spending is kept at a minimum. In China spending is frowned upon, and the money is just collected and not spent. This means that there is not enough money to consume.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
