News Values

News stories are what keeps the world up to date with the current on-goings in society. But how do these news stories work? How do you differentiate between a happy story and a sad one? And most importantly: how does an editor decide which story is the most important?

This is where news values come into the picture (or story…). News values come in many different shapes and sizes (Okay. They don’t really, but bear with me.) The most common types of news values you will find in your newspaper are as follows: impact, audience identification, pragmatics and source influence. However, these can be broken down even further into smaller, more specific categories. These can be anything from celebrity, human interest (which is actually a pretty broad category in itself), all the way to terrorism. Depending on which news value the story has will determine the importance of said story.

One definition of a news value is: “The degree of prominence a media outlet gives to a story, and the attention that is paid by an audience.” A good example of this is September 11. All over the newspapers, news shows and internet forums, everyone was reporting on the tragedy that had occurred and what was going to happen afterwards. This is because a lot of people were affected by this and many more were still in danger.

Another factor in what deems the importance of a particular story is location. For example, unless it was going to have a significant impact, an Australian newspaper wouldn’t report on a robbery in a small American town, and visa versa. An Australian newspaper would, however, print a story about a robbery that happened in a small Australian town. This is a part of the rule “If it’s local, it leads”. The other part of the rule being, “If it bleeds, it leads”, meaning that if a mass shooting happens, or a horrific car accident takes place, it usually ends up on the front page somewhere, or everywhere.

Finally, I will leave you with this quote from Arthur Evelyn Waugh whilst you ponder on what you believe to be newsworthy. “News is what a chap who doesn't care much about anything wants to read. And it's only news until he's read it. After that it's dead.”  

Stuebenville Sheds Light On Terrible World

The two rapists; Trent Mays and MaLik Richmonds.

Stuebenville, Ohio is usually a quiet town. But a case of rape involving a young girl and two young males has bought unwanted attention to the once serene place.

The victim, “Jane Doe”, was repeatedly raped after the two young males, Trent Mays, 17, and his teammate Mal’lick Richmond, 16, found her unconscious in the middle of a road near a high school party on the 12^th of August 2012. The victim has stated repeatedly that she was “very drunk” and doesn’t remember a lot of that night.

It is alleged that she did not even find out that the incident had occurred until she found a picture of herself via social media with what looked like semen on her stomach.

“Jane Doe” is just one of the many victims of a flawed society who have fallen victim to rape culture. This phenomenon is described as “[…] a culture in which rape and sexual violence are common and in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media normalize, excuse, tolerate, or even condone rape.” Sadly, 54% of rape incidents go unreported every year as a result of this.

Many victims of rape are left feeling that the attack is somehow their fault. That they deserved it. By speaking out against her attackers, “Jane Doe” has done something remarkable, and is in turn been punished for it.

People who used to be her friends turned their back against her, many of them females. The football team which her attackers belong to tried to sweep the incident under the carpet, with much of the town willing to help. Because these two boys were star football players, their heinous crimes were to be overlooked. If it wasn’t for her parents persistence to report it to the police, this case might never have seen the light of day.

Throughout the course of this now infamous case, “Jane Doe” has been subjected to many forms of taunting and abuse, including death threats, whilst the two rapists were sympathised with.

Coverage from CNN included the reporters commenting on how the two rapists, Trent Mays and Ma'lik Richmond’s lives were now ruined as they had “such bright futures” and were “model students”. Not one word was mentioned about how the young girl’s life was also ruined because of their actions.

This disgusting report has resulted in a petition going around with over two-hundred and twenty thousand signatures getting CNN to apologize for sympathizing with the rapists.

Sadly, this is world we live in. A world where women are blamed for being raped because of what they wear and because men believe that they are entitled to use women as they please. Because obviously women are objects, not human beings with emotions, fears and rights.

A Pope for the New Ages?

For the Catholics around the world, it was a step forwards. But for the millions of LGBTQ people around the world, it was a step backwards. It was the news that millions waited for with baited breath. Ever since Pope Benedict XVI announced his retirement, the entire world – regardless of their religion or sexual orientation – awaited the news of who would be his replacement.

Finally, on the thirteenth of March, it was announced that Pope Francis would be taking over. Given that this is such a historic moment – and one that many people will only ever see once in their lifetime – it is a surprise that nearly all of the thousands who gathered to watch the event, chose to view it through the screens of their iPhone or camera. This is the difference that eight years and a technology advance makes.

Along with the technology, people’s opinions are also changing and advancing. So it comes as surprise to some that this new pope is also homophobic. Whilst most people wouldn’t bat an eyelash at this information (some would agree with the new pope), other people are beginning to wonder. Isn’t it time for a pope who’s in favour of same-sex marriage?

Pope Francis has already stated his opinion on the matter, making it clear what his stance on same-sex marriage is. “Let’s not be naïve, we’re not talking about a simple political battle; it is a destructive pretension against the plan of God,” Pope Francis disputed. But he didn’t stop there. He continued his hate speech by stating why same-sex marriage shouldn’t be legalized, “We are not talking about a mere bill, but rather a machination of the Father of Lies that seeks to confuse and deceive the children of God.”

Despite having a tonne of cases of sexual abuse within the Vatican, Pope Francis also took a dig at same-sex couples adopting.  “The Argentine people will face a situation whose outcome can seriously harm the family… At stake is the identity and survival of the family: father, mother and children.”

Whether or not he knows it, these words, both written and spoken aloud, will have a huge effect on the world in the coming years. Whilst countless countries have and still are legalising same-sex marriage, many more are stuck in the dark ages, still punishing people who come out as anything other than heterosexual. Powerful figures like the Pope saying dangerous and poisonous things like this are only pushing these people to cause more harm to our already fragile society.

So many advances have been made in the past decade. Can’t a Pope supporting same-sex marriage be another milestone to add to a growing list?

Entitlement: Will it be the death of the Journalist?

One hundred years ago, the human race didn't need so much as a telephone to get by. These days, our dependency on technology is rapidly increasing. From downloading movies to doing your groceries, the internet has become integrated into our everyday lives in a big way.

When the internet first became an everyday thing, it was mainly used for emails and looking things up. Then came the dawn of the social networking age. Facebook and Myspace became all the rage, and people started creating more content than ever, more than doubling the information that was available on the internet. Then in 2006, social networking was changed forever when Twitter came along.

Although it took a couple of years to take off, the 140 character “micro blog”, as it is referred to, took off in a huge way. With a staggering 520’250’000 users world-wide and over one-hundred and eighty million tweets a day, twitter has become one of the most popular social networking sites in the world. Its #search method has also enable journalists to have a quicker, more efficient way to get news of the day. However, this also means that the public also had a quicker, more efficient way to get the news, that didn't involve the newspaper or journalists.

Long before Twitter however, newspapers had begun to upload their stories on to the internet for free. Although this is nothing new in the virtual world, paying for that news is. Media watch covered this in their article "Paying for the news".

Most people will only pay for their news if it’s in a newspaper and according to a survey conducted online, eighty-six percent of people would not be willing to pay for their online news. Much like a young child who was given “free” jelly beans and then told to pay for them after eating some, the public has reacted in much the same manner. They believe that they are entitled to their share of free news. Hence why only a measly fourteen percent stated that they would be willing to pay five dollars per month to receive their news online.  So what does this mean for the future of journalism?

With speculations that newspapers could soon be a thing of the past, the journalism world is in panic mode. Whilst it would have seemed like a brilliant idea at the time to upload the daily news onto the internet available to the public for free, many newspapers are having doubts about their “brilliant” idea.

This completely unforeseen situation has a name.

It’s called “Amara’s law” and focuses on “… overestimat[ing] the effect of a technology in the short run and underestimate[ing] the effect in the long run”, which perfectly sums up what’s happening right now.  If the public continue to refuse to pay for their online news and continue to source it from Twitter and Facebook, then the journalism profession may become a thing of the past. But how long would the world last without it’s journalists there to tell the world’s people about what’s going on around them? Only time will tell. 

Commercial media: is it really doing us any good?

"In this regard, one things stands out above all others - the view that the very nature of the commercial equates to a corruption of the social. In other words, as media become more commercial, they do so at the expense of their social function. This is seen as zero-sum game. Profits come before equality."

The quote from Professor Michel Bromley sums up the daily injustice that are our commercial media outlets (ie; various newspapers, television stations, radio stations and magazines). They cast aside the relevant and important issues in our society today in favour of trashy, tabloid stores about celebrities and fashion. This is done out of a need to make a profit. But has it gotten to the point where money is more important than actual news worthy stories? 

If you looked at a newspaper, say for example, The Courier Mail, your chances of finding an important and newsworthy story on the front page would be very slim. Depending on what the latest scandal is, you could be seeing anything from Kate and William's unborn child, to a sports scandal - most likely to be involved with the AFL or rugby. The sad things is, this shocking phenomena has been going on for years. 

It seems that people these days are more interested in the latest celebrity "news" (ie; the use of drugs in sport) than the state of our hospitals, or the fact that our LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) youth are three and a half to fourteen times more likely to attempt suicide than the general community. But are there news stories on either of these things? No, there are not. Instead, every news program, newspaper, and radio station focuses on the issue of drugs in sport and how that "affects" the rest of the country. How and when did the issue of what steroids athletes use become more important than preventing our youth from dying?

One journalism student shared her opinion on the matter, "I think that there are some issues that need to be much more prevalent in the media than some of the topics that are being reported," she said. "There needs to be more articles on what's happening in Iraq, or the issue of sexism and how it's still prominent in society."

Whether or not the media ever do start reporting on what's important, one thing's for sure;
as media become more commercial, they are most certainly doing so at the expense of their social function.

Mardi Gras Nightmare Tip of the Iceberg

It was supposed to be a night of fun and celebration, instead for one teenager, Mardi Gras became a living nightmare. Jamie Jackson, just eighteen years of age, was approached by the police after he innocently tickled a fellow Mardi Gras goer. Later on in the evening, Jackson was apprehended with a charge of offensive language at approximately 10PM. After a couple of minutes, the altercation became violent, with Jackson being thrown to the ground by the police officers. In new footage recently released, a woman can be heard screaming at the police officer, "We just saw you throw his head against the ground. His blood is on the ground!" Jackson commented on the situation to A Current Affair, "I could have been killed," he said, "The way they threw me on the ground, like, if I hit my head in the wrong position... it was just crazy. I was in handcuffs, what could I have done? Why did I have to get thrown down like that? Why couldn't he handle it, like, maturely?" 

Jackson claims that at the time of the tickling incident, the woman was on her phone. Initially she did not take any offense to his actions. She just turned away and continued her phone conversation. "I'm not even sure that tickling someone counted as an offence," Jackson told A Current Affair. "Okay, yes, I shouldn't have approached someone I didn't know, I understand that, but I just don't even know how it got to this point. I just don't know a simple altercation could turn into a big, massive scuffle." He says that memories of the incident are hazy, but he believes that he blacked out  after he was thrown against the ground the second time, and awoke seconds later, crying. Whether or not the appropriate level of force was used is debatable. The State MP and gay rights activist, Alex Greenwich, has spoken out about the situation, stating that is was very concerning that a police officer "body slammed" a teenage boy for swearing. He then went on to say, "If the only thing that the individual did was use offensive language, then I think that many would agree that the approach the police took to the situation and the body slam on the ground is certainly a heavy handed approach to the matter."

Jackson just hours before the incident.

Another incident that occurred on the night leads to speculation that the brutality used on young Jamie Jackson has been more prevalent in society than it may have seemed. Gay activist, Bry Hutchinson, was also assaulted on the same night. He was held down by five police officers and kicked after ignoring their instructions not to cross a road."I was kicked several times," the former convenor of the Community Action Against Homophobia said, "I had my face pushed into the ground," and perhaps the most shocking revelation yet, "I had a police officer leaning on me. I told him I couldn't breathe. He told me, 'If you can talk, you can breathe.'" Evidence like this suggests that the officers policing the Mardi Gras may have some issues that need dealing with. 

One man at a recent rally against police brutality said, "Police are constantly abusing people and taking advantage of their position of power and not being held accountable for it," Rami, 24, who did not disclose his last name, "It makes no sense to have police investigate police ... it needs to be independent and transparent." He also said that he hopes the police know that they "can't get away with everything they do. If you act outside of your power and if you take advantage of your position of power the community won't be quiet," he said.

Jamie Jackson will appear in court on the first of April, and Bryn Hutchinson will appear in court on the fifth of April.