Tuesday, June 10, 2008

Real Debate


Last night's Richard Bacon programme on 5 Live radio had a really intense debate about the role of newspapers and the news media in a democracy. Tim Luckhurst, who used to edit the Scotsman newspaper and is now Professor of Journalism at the University of Kent made some really forceful arguments in favour of traditional journalism and paid for newspapers as a way of holding government to account and offering readers a properly informed choice because of their investment in fact gathering when news reporting. They differ from blogging and other forms of citizen reporting because of this and their wider perspective. Richard Bacon tried, in vain, to get him to accept that blogging is an equally democratic source of information as it provides readers with a perspective they may not find elsewhere. However, Luckhurst insisted that ultimately blogs tend to be more opinion based and therefore cannot replace proper investigative in holding government to account. Neither can they offer readers the more rounded perspective on issues as they report a story from a very local viewpoint.

You should be able to listen again by clicking on the title above and clicking on Monday's programme. I heard the debate from about two hours into the programme, though it was already in full flow by then. This would be very useful for both Broadcast News and Freedom of the Press.

Monday, June 09, 2008

The Paparazzi Point of View


The Guardian has an interview with Darryn Lyons, who runs Britain's biggest picture agency. They sell paparazzi photos to newspapers and magazines. You may have seen him on TV - the Australian with the multi-coloured mohican. In the interview he offers a range of opinions on the role of his agency and the paparazzi in today's society, claiming that celebrities largely rely on people like him for their careers - including those like Abi Titmus who have deals with the agencies to take a cut of 'paparazzi' shots of them sold to newspapers. Interestingly, he now has a website where members of the public can submit their own photos of celebrities to be published - http://www.mrpaparazzi.com/. The existence of such sites begs the question, how can you regulate 'the press' when it's the public as much as the press industry who are now generating what might be considered invasive images. How does the PCC control how much members of the public 'harrass' celebrities in order to take photos of them?