Interviewee's full name and position in society: Luke Underdown (age 17) studying at Heathfield Community College.
Me: Hello, I'm going to start off with a fairly simple question, do you like using busses?
Interviewee: "They're alright, it gets me to places but it takes way too long with all the stops a long the way and it can be unhygienic."
Me: "Why are they unhygienic?"
Interviewee: "There's always empty food wrappers and bottles lying around the floor."
Me: "How often do you use the bus?"
Interviewee: "I use it almost everyday to get to college and back and sometimes weekends as well to meet people."
Me: "Do you have to wait very long for your bus?"
Interviewee: "Yes I'm always waiting for at least 15 minutes which is a pain, especially now as it's freezing cold all the time."
Me: "Are you happy with the service of the busses you get? If not, why?"
Interviewee: "Not really, as soon as I show my ticket the bus driver starts to drive off without giving me a chance to sit down. They are usually quite moody as well and also drive way too fast when it's dark. The busses should also be cleaned at least once during the day."
Me: "What would you change about the service?"
Interviewee: "Firstly, I'd like to have double-decker busses as I'm always on a cramped single bus where there is no room to move and people are squeezing past you at every stop. Also, as I said before I'd like the busses to be cleaned once or twice during the day even though it's not their fault as people should eat or drink on the bus. I'd like to make a point about the cost of a ticket. Its way too expensive and also for a weekly ticket its £16 which is far too much for students who have to go to college everyday and what makes it even more unfair is that it takes so long to get to where you want to go."
Tuesday, 24 January 2017
Tuesday, 22 November 2016
Libel notes
IPSO have no legal powers, they can't take you to court.
You must pay to sue for libel. You don't need any money to complain to IPSO regulator.
If you're guilt of libel you will be asked to pay damages to the person you have committed against.
You could also be asked to pay for legal fees too, sometimes even both.
The regulator could asked the journalist to write a letter of apology to the person making te complaint.
Furthermore, the story may have to be taken down off the website.
The regulator may ask to publish an apology in the next newspaper, it doesn't say where it has to be therefore the newspaper can decide where they want to write it, most often buried in the middle, barely visible.
You must pay to sue for libel. You don't need any money to complain to IPSO regulator.
If you're guilt of libel you will be asked to pay damages to the person you have committed against.
You could also be asked to pay for legal fees too, sometimes even both.
The regulator could asked the journalist to write a letter of apology to the person making te complaint.
Furthermore, the story may have to be taken down off the website.
The regulator may ask to publish an apology in the next newspaper, it doesn't say where it has to be therefore the newspaper can decide where they want to write it, most often buried in the middle, barely visible.
Monday, 21 November 2016
subverted stereotype presentation
The advert we decided to pick for the subverted stereotype was the new money supermarket advert this year. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qdeB1eGK57o
Primary codes: The clothes worn by the dancer are not stereo-typically what a man would wear. His body language is camp and walks/dances in a woman-like way. He dresses as a man on the top half of his body where he is wearing a suit and not wearing any makeup and then he wears women's clothes below (short shorts and high heels)
Secondary codes: The dancer is holding shopping bags to show that there is a stereotype that women do the shopping and this advert is breaking down the barriers of that. Furthermore, the lightening coming from the ceiling is focused mainly on the dancers and it's fairly dark around them. This may possibly link to a private dance club where the light is focused on to the pole and the dancer.
Impact: When someone views this they will laugh because it's unusual and rarely seen and they may think it's okay to wear women's clothing or vice versa
Similarities and Differences: Some differences would be that the two gender representation are the exact opposite. A similarity would be that they both have powerful messages despite being positive and negative.
Primary codes: The clothes worn by the dancer are not stereo-typically what a man would wear. His body language is camp and walks/dances in a woman-like way. He dresses as a man on the top half of his body where he is wearing a suit and not wearing any makeup and then he wears women's clothes below (short shorts and high heels)
Secondary codes: The dancer is holding shopping bags to show that there is a stereotype that women do the shopping and this advert is breaking down the barriers of that. Furthermore, the lightening coming from the ceiling is focused mainly on the dancers and it's fairly dark around them. This may possibly link to a private dance club where the light is focused on to the pole and the dancer.
Impact: When someone views this they will laugh because it's unusual and rarely seen and they may think it's okay to wear women's clothing or vice versa
Similarities and Differences: Some differences would be that the two gender representation are the exact opposite. A similarity would be that they both have powerful messages despite being positive and negative.
Tuesday, 15 November 2016
Celebrity libel cases worksheet
1.
|
Which
celebrity case is this?
|
|
Frankie Boyle Vs The Daily Mirror
|
|
Q1. Who sued
who?
|
|
Boyle sued the Daily Mirror
|
|
Q2. Why? Give
an outline of the case in your own words.
|
|
The Daily Mirror accused Boyle of being a raciest
comedian. He claimed the was untrue
|
|
Q3. Who won?
Who lost?
|
|
Boyle won, The Mirror lost
|
|
Q4. Why did
the loser lose this case?
|
|
Because they had no evidence
|
|
Q5. What was
the punishment?
|
|
Mirror paid damages of £54K
|
|
Q6. What
steps should the loser have taken to avoid being sued for libel?
|
|
They should have had some evidence and told the
truth
|
2.
|
Which
celebrity case is this?
|
|
Peter Andre – Katie Price
|
|
Q1. Who sued
who?
|
|
Andre sued Price
|
|
Q2. Why? Give
an outline of the case in your own words.
|
|
Price told the media that Andre was unfaithful to
her
|
|
Q3. Who won?
Who lost?
|
|
Andre won, Price lost
|
|
Q4. Why did
the loser lose this case?
|
|
She didn’t provide any evidence
|
|
Q5. What was
the punishment?
|
|
Price had to pay Andre
|
|
Q6. What
steps should the loser have taken to avoid being sued for libel?
|
|
To not lie to the media in the first place
|
Libel - Suing because someone has damaged their reputation
Statement - defamatory. Tends to do any of the following:
-Expose a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt
-Causes them to be shunned or avoided
-Lowers them in the estimation of their peers
-Disparages them in their business, trade, office or profession
Claimants have to show that the publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to their reputation. The claimant does not have to prove that the statement is untrue.
Penalties for committing libel:
-You would have to pay damages
-Pay the other sides legal fees
-You could be ordered to pay both damages and legal fees
My main defence to libel will be the justification defence
What I say will be the truth. I will be able to prove anything that I say or broadcast will be the truth. If I can prove this it will be the truth.
Statement - defamatory. Tends to do any of the following:
-Expose a person to hatred, ridicule or contempt
-Causes them to be shunned or avoided
-Lowers them in the estimation of their peers
-Disparages them in their business, trade, office or profession
Claimants have to show that the publication has caused or is likely to cause serious harm to their reputation. The claimant does not have to prove that the statement is untrue.
Penalties for committing libel:
-You would have to pay damages
-Pay the other sides legal fees
-You could be ordered to pay both damages and legal fees
My main defence to libel will be the justification defence
What I say will be the truth. I will be able to prove anything that I say or broadcast will be the truth. If I can prove this it will be the truth.
Homework - Find a UK libel case study
The news article I looked at was about JK Rowling suing the Daily Mail over a 'single mother sob story'
Who was the complaint? - The complaint was made by JK Rowling after reading that it was misrepresentative of her comments made before she became famous.
Why did she make the complaint? - It was damaging her reputation and also caused her embarrassment and distress. Rowling’s legal team say the article gave a “false account of her time as a single mother in Edinburgh” where she was portrayed as having “accused her fellow churchgoers of behaving in a bigoted, unchristian manner towards her, of stigmatising her and cruelly taunting her for being a single mother.”
Who was the complaint? - The complaint was made by JK Rowling after reading that it was misrepresentative of her comments made before she became famous.
Why did she make the complaint? - It was damaging her reputation and also caused her embarrassment and distress. Rowling’s legal team say the article gave a “false account of her time as a single mother in Edinburgh” where she was portrayed as having “accused her fellow churchgoers of behaving in a bigoted, unchristian manner towards her, of stigmatising her and cruelly taunting her for being a single mother.”
When was the case? - The Daily Mail published on its website on 28 September 2013.
What publication was taken to court and what was said that was libellous? - Rowling’s legal team say the article gave a false account of her time as a single mother in Edinburgh. The legal team also argued that the article wrongly claimed that Ms Rowling’s congregation has been “upset and bewildered” or “surprised and confused”.
In the NUJ Code of Conduct, this breaks rules: 2 (Strives to ensure that information disseminated is honestly conveyed, accurate and fair.), 3 (Does her/his utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies.), 6 (Does nothing to intrude into anybody’s private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest.)
How was it resolved? - The article has since been taken down from the Mail Online. Ms Rowling’s legal team wants to see an injunction preventing the piece, or “the same or any similar defamatory words” being published.
Monday, 14 November 2016
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)