Local Hero

Student has saved an 84-year-old man from a fire on Monday after seeing flames in the ground floor of his Chatham Road flat.

20-year-old Edward Herbert saw the flames at around 21:15 from the flat in Winchester on Monday when he took a ladder to get to the man who was in his bedroom at the time.

The student managed to get the man to the window so he could breathe but due to the smoke the man fainted twice.

A member from the ambulance crew then gave the man oxygen and assisted him down from the flat. The man is now in hospital after suffering from smoke inhalation but is not seriously harmed.

Edward said, "I just wanted to get him out" and added, "He fainted twice and I thought the worst".

When the fire service arrived it took one jet, two hose reels and four sets of breathing apparatus to end the fire and positive pressure ventilation fans were used in the property.

Edward also said, "I will definitely go to see him in hospital".

Search for fisherman has been called off

The search for a fisherman who went missing on the 1st December along the Dorset coast has been ended.

32-year-old Osman Sharif left Mudeford Quay on Tuesday, where his car remained, but he did not return home, so his family called the police at 11:05pm.

The fisherman's boat was found along the shore of Chewton Bunny in Hampshire, and an air, sea and shoreline search was put in place, however now the investigation has been passed to the Dorset Police.

Inspector Tracey Baker, of Dorset Police’s County Division said, “We will continue to work with the Maritime and Coastguard Agency and the requirement for further searches will be dependent on any further information we may receive concerning the missing man or his whereabouts.”

County Council launches campaign against driving under the influence

The Hampshire County Council is to launch a safety campaign from November 30th, to try to stop driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

The Council will be using taxi’s in Hampshire areas such as, Gosport, Winchester, Basingstoke and Andover with the slogan “I’ll drink, you drive”, to help people act responsibly whilst on night’s out over the Christmas period.

People’s driving ability is affected by just one drink and any drugs, and driving after taking either of theses creates a risk for you and other road users, which was seen in the 15,935 people who were injured or killed in a drink driving incident in 2007 alone.

Being caught driving under the influence of drink has the same penalty as with drugs, which is a £5,000 fine and a ban from diving for a year.

The Council is also suggesting that people should consider how safe their prescribed medication is, asking the question, “Could your prescribed or over-the-counter medication impair your driving? Always ask the pharmacist.”

Councillor Kendal the Executive Member for Environment said:
“We want everyone to get home safely, Having just one drink or taking drugs will impair driving skills. Driving whilst under the influence of drink or drugs is extremely dangerous and could harm you and innocent road users.”

Sergeant John Dainton from Hampshire Constabulary Road Policing unit stated:
“We’’ be out patrolling the roads throughout Christmas and New Year as we do all year round. If you’re foolish enough to drive whilst under the influence, the chances are you will get caught.”

This campaign will be running for six weeks beginning the 30th November and the pharmacy bag campaign will be running until the end of December.

News Agenda - The Hampshire Chronicle & The Coast 106

To being with, the Hampshire Chronicle has been publishing newspapers since August 24th 1772. When first introduced, the newspaper reported national and international news, with headlines such as, ‘It would seem as if Bonaparte can never mention England without losing his temper’, ‘English Literature printed in Paris’, and ‘Arming the Country in case of Invasion’. This was until the London newspapers started to circulate around the country. Nowadays it focuses on local news within Winchester, but also publishes a newspaper, which deals with the current news in Southampton. It is owned by ‘Newsquest’ which is the second largest publisher of local and regional newspapers in the UK. The Hampshire Chronicle targets people over 65 who are within the ABC1 social class. The male and female demographic for this newspaper is 52 percent women and 48 percent men. It has become clear that the people targeted are likely to have a family and be homeowners due to the advertisements placed within the newspaper. Advertisements for oakwood flooring, funeral directors and hospitals are all included in this newspaper to appeal to the reader, as they will feel as though the adverts are being hand picked for them. The Hampshire Chronicle covers local stories, which occur within Winchester, such as ‘City Parking Charges up to Boost Park & Ride’. They have covered this story because it is an issue, which will directly affect the citizens of Winchester. Relating to the audience who have families are the stories covering local schools. Parents with children in the schools being challenged by the local government need to be kept informed of the progress the schools are making and the Hampshire Chronicle ensures this is achieved. The Hampshire Chronicle’s news agenda is less concerned with national matters and more focussed on local news within Hampshire County Council. They target the citizens of this county and report on matters which, will be of use to them.
The Coast 106 was previously Original 106 to which the previous license holders were CanWest and put Original 106 up for sale. After being put up for sale Original 106 was bought by Paul Smith. This then lead to the radio station becoming the Coast 106, which began broadcasting in October 2008 to the Southern region.
The target audience for the Coast 106 is both male and females over 44. The demographic for this is 50:50. The audience is also said to be of the ABC1 social class. A way in which this local radio station appeals to its audience is through its music choice as it plays adult classic and contemporary music. Another way the Coast 106 attracts its audience is through the advertisement used in between songs. These adverts are aimed at parents and householders as the products are, ‘Civ-active-fizz’, ‘Persil’ and ‘confused.com’. The motto of the Coast 106 is ‘More tracks, less chat’. People over 40 are less likely to be interested in contacting the radio station for competitions for example and are more interested in listening to the song choice of the station.
The Ofcom regulations for local radio stations states, ‘each station should have direct and accountable editorial responsibility for covering its licensed area’. Like the Hampshire Chronicle, the Coast is more concerned with local news rather than national news due to the nature of the station. A typical news bulletin during a weekday includes news regarding individuals within the broadcasting area, such as their achievements or traumas. It also includes events happening in the area, or news concerning local businesses etc. Although the Coast 106 is a local radio station, their website provides a table illustrating at what points within the day it covers local or national news. National news is covered between 7pm and 5am on weekdays, to which local news is covered during peak-times of the day. However, on weekends national news is covered more often than local news due to the decrease in audience at that time. After reading and listening to the Hampshire Chronicle and the Coast 106 I have noticed that they have very similar news agendas and audiences and I feel they both achieve their aims successfully.

Keeping us Informed

When I went home at the weekend there was a flyer posted through our door. I live in Portchester and for at least a year now people within our community have been complaining about the smell from a local farm. It was to say the very least unpleasant and hit you everytime you walked out of your front door. I personally never knew what it was and just assumed it was a local farm.
Our Environment Agency has now given us information about what the farm actually does and how long it will be continuing. It is in fact the Downend Composting Site, which takes the green waste from our houses, shreds the waste then forms it into rows where the composting process begins. The end product is soil which is rich in nutrients and is peat free. The site will close in December 2010 and all composting operations will end.
Now I am aware of why the odour is being produced I am more accepting to the smell as I know the process is going to benefit the environment and no doubt us at some point.
I do think however that the local goverment and Environmental Agency need to inform us of things happening within our community as this will prevent a lot of complaints from citizens and we will be more accepting.

HCJ - Week 8 Rousseau 'The Social Contract'

This week Claire and I had to lead the history and context of journalism seminar. Our topic was the 'Social Contract' written by Jean Rousseau. Here are my notes on the contract:


Subject of the First Book –
‘Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains’ – by this Rousseau means that society puts man in chains through rules and restrictions.
The First Societies –
Family is the only natural society. The child owes obedience to their father and the father owes a duty of care to his child. This bond dissolves eventually and both the father and child return to independence. If this does not happen however, the family is only maintained by convention.
He believes that everyone should have their own independence which as a result means their family is no longer natural.
Man’s first law is to provide for his own preservation, his first cares are those which he owes himself, and when he reaches year of discretion, he is the sole judge of the proper means of preserving himself, and consequently becomes his own master.
A family is said to be a model of political societies. The father is seen as the ruler and the children are seen as the people. Rousseau states they are all born free and equal however they alienate their liberty only for their own advantage. This illustrates that people thought it was their most rational self-interest to voluntarily give up the freedom they had in the state of nature in order to obtain the benefits of political order.
It is stated that the father is repaid for the care he takes of them by the love for his children, whereas in the State, the chief takes pleasure in commanding because he cannot love the people under him.
Both Hobbes and Grotius (who was a jurist in the Dutch Republic and a philosopher) believe that the human race belongs to hundreds of men as oppose to hundreds of men belonging to the human race.
Aristotle saw that no man is equal by nature. He believed that some men are born for slavery whereas other are born for dominion. He then stated that every man born in slavery is born for slavery. In ‘The Subject of the First Book’, it was said that ‘man is born free; and everywhere he is in chains.’ A slave however, loses everything in their chains even the desire of escaping from them.
3 – The Right of the Strongest
Rousseau states ‘the strongest is never strong enough to be always the master’. Strength is measured by force and it is argued here, that to stop force should be a necessity and not seen as an act of will. Essentially it is wrong to view someone carrying out a necessity, as performing one of their duties as it is not just a duty of a master to stop force, it is the duty of everyone and should not be praised. Rousseau goes on to say that ‘force does not create right’, which illustrates that ‘the right of the strongest’ does not define justice.
4 – Slavery
This passage questions the concept of slaves and their motives behind becoming a slave.
No one is born with authority over anyone else. It is conventions created over time which form the basis of legitimate authority among everyone. Grotius asks, ‘if an individual can alienate his liberty and make himself the slave of a master, why could not someone so the same and make itself subject to a king?’ In this instance the slave has sold himself to the king, however, Grotius questions what this slave has left to preserve and what they gain from becoming a slave. He says, ‘Tranquillity is also found in dungeons; but is that enough to make them desirable places to live in?’
It is beyond paternity rights for a man to alienate his children. Up until the years of discretion the father can lay down conditions for his children’s preservation and well being. An idea evolved that in every government the people should be in a position to accept or reject it, however this caused the issue that the government would no longer be arbitrary.
It was pointed out that surrendering the rights of humanity renouncing being a man is a result of renouncing liberty.
Grotius explains that there is another origin of slavery and that is war. This is because the people defeated in war have to buy their lives back at his price of liberty, whereas the winners of war have the right of killing the vanquished.
War is begun due to ‘things’ as oppose to people. This is because a war cannot arise out of personal relations it has to be by real relations whereby the laws hold authority. War is therefore a relation between state and state, to which individuals are only enemies accidentally as soldiers. Once a war is ended and the soldiers surrender, they become equal again and no-one has the right to take anyone’s life. Within war it is only acceptable to kill an enemy if it is not possible to enslave them. If slaves are made within war, they only have to obey their master as far as agreed. By doing this, the master is far from putting any authority on the slave other than force.
5 – That Me Must Always Go Back To A First Convention
In this chapter Rousseau looks at the way power and authority are given to others, to use over other people. He implies that for a convention to exist there must have been unanimity (everyone being of one mind) at some point in history.
6 – The Social Compact
In this chapter Rousseau explains how it is necessary for the social contract to be developed. The social compact is what people made when they left the state of nature and entered a civilised society.
It is said that the human race will perish unless the state changed the manner of its existence.
The problem that arose was;
‘…To find a form of association which will defend and protect with the whole common force the person and goods of each associate, and in which each, while uniting himself with all, may still obey himself alone, and remain as free as before.’
Any alterations of any of the clauses within the act would make them ‘vain’ and ‘ineffective’.
If all the clauses were properly understood they can be combined into one. Which would be; the total alienation of each associate, with all his rights and whilst being among the rest of the community, will result in the conditions being the same for everyone to which no-one will have the right or interest to make them ‘burdensome’ to anyone else.
The alienation of each associate, and people retaining certain rights, would lead to the state on nature continuing, however the association would no longer work or take effect.
The result of giving up all of himself, is to gain an equivalent to in return for all his losses.
Rousseau then states that by taking away what is not the essence of the social compact, it becomes reduced;
"Each of us puts his person and all his power in common under the supreme direction of the general will, and, in our corporate capacity, we receive each member as an invisible part of the whole."
This means that although the person is ‘invisible’ all people under the supreme direction are seen as equal and part of a community, and therefore are then regarded as the ‘people’.
　
7- The Sovereign
In this chapter it becomes apparent that each individual is bound in a double capacity, whereby they are a member of the state to the sovereign and are bound to the individuals, as well as being a member of the State to the sovereign. This is because the act of association involves a mutual undertaking between the public and the individuals.
The sovereign cannot be bound to the people because it would be against the nature of the body politic for the sovereign to introduce a law, which it could not violate. The seriousness of violating the act is expressed when it is stated that it would be ‘self-annihilation’ which means to kill yourself.
The sovereign must have only the interests of the individuals who have composed. As well as this the sovereign must not guarantee anything to the individuals, as it is impossible to please or hurt everyone.
Every individual may have their own will, which may contrast or differ from the general will, and looking at their own will would be an injustice. Simply looking at the general will, will prevent any personal dependence and therefore introduce the workings of the political machine.
　
8 – The Civil State
In this section, Rousseau is stating that when someone passes from the state of nature to the civil state, he then has instinct in regards to his actions. Due to this change, he is made to consider other citizens before he acts. Entering into the civil state, he will become an intelligent being and a man, due to the advantages such as, ‘his feelings so ennobled’ and his extended ideas.
Rousseau explains that when comparing the two, we must realise that natural liberty is bounded only by the strength of the individual, whereas civil liberty (which is one’s freedom to exercise one’s rights as guaranteed under the laws of the country) is limited by general will. When mentioning possession, I think Rousseau is saying that being a citizen means you have right over your possessions due to the effect of force, whereas in natural law this does not exist.
9 – Real Property
Citizens give themselves to the State, and as a result of this, their possessions become property under the Sovereign. Although the sovereign has the most power, the property still belongs to the citizen as it is by right of the first occupier.
Within this passage, I think Rousseau is stating that citizens cannot be greedy when it comes to ownership, and if that person has worked for the ownership of that product he will be respected by others.
It is also implied in this passage that Rousseau would prefer men to share land, for example, equally and enjoy it all together rather than having separate owners and separate rights.
Rousseau concludes book 1 of the Social Contract by saying;
"Instead of destroying natural inequality, the fundamental compact substitutes, for such physical inequality as nature may have set up between men, an equality that is moral and legitimate, and that men, who may be unequal in strength or intelligence, become every one equal by convention and legal right".

(Hope these help)

Week 8 Media Law - Freedom of Information Act 2000

To begin with I'll state the basic principle of the Freedom of Information Act 2000.

'Any person making a request for information from a public authority is entitled;

a) to be informed in writing by the public authority whether it holds information of the description specified in the request, and
(b) if that is the case, to have that information communicated to him.'

The public authorities must disclose information without any financial charge for finding or collating it, if meeting the request costs the public authority no more than £600 or £450. The introduction of the Act has given journalists and researchers great success. There are four disclosures which have been prompted by regional and local journalists when using the Act. These are;
- the number of under 16's requiring treatment for drug problems and alcohol-related illness at a local hospital,
- the number of police arrests for alleged crimes,
- How many crimes reported to police are given no publicity by the police - including alleged sexual assaults, and
- how many children have been excluded from local schools.

BBC journalists have prompted the disclosures regarding relations that;
- only two councils had met goverment targets on the welfare of children in council care,
- councils in the South of England had made the same planning procedure mistake 68 times in relation to moblie phone masts, and
- elderly residents of a nursing home allegedly suffered verbal and physical abuse.

For other stories to which journalists have written from the use of the Act visit, http://www.holdthefrontpage.co.uk/index.shtml

A few examples of public authorities under the 2000 Act are;
- National government department and ministries
- The House of Commons
- The armed forces
- Local government authorities
- National park authorities
- Universities, colleges and schools
- The NHS
- Various advisory councils, and regulatory bodies with statutory powers.

The UK's security and intelligence agencies are not covered by the FOI Act 2000. These included the MI5, MI6 and GCHQ and are all exempt from the Act. This means they do not have to repsond to FOI requests. In addition to this, courts and tribunals are not covered by the Act.

If a public authority receives a request for information, it must normally make a repsonse within 20 working days, either supplying the information or explaining why it cannot be supplied. The public authority may not hold the information, or the request would exceed the cost limits for the provision of free information, or the information is covered by exemptions under the Act, and therefore need not be supplied. In any of these instances, the public authority must communicate these restrictions.

Under s48 of the FOIA, information is defined as 'information recorded in any form'. The Act does not require a public authority to gather information it does not already have.

The Act allows authorities to refuse to supply information on various grounds. These are known as exemptions. The Information Commissioner's Office website has helpful guidance on these to which it enables searches of his decisions on their use categorised usefully by which exemption was claimed.
Absolute exmptions are whereby the public authority does not have to give any reason for nt disclosing the information, beyond stating that the exemption applies because of the nature of the information. Absolute exemptions include; information reasonably accessible by other means, information supplied to the public authority by or relating to bodies dealing with security matters, court records, personal information and information provided to the authority in confidence by another party.
Qualified exemption means that if the public authority decides not to supply the information in these categories, it must give reasons, showing how it has applied the 'public interest test' to justify its refusal to provide information. Information can be withheld if the public interest in withholding the information is greater than the public interest in releasing it.
Public authorities should disclose information if it has the following factors;
- Furthering the understanding and participation in the public debate of issues of the day,
- Promoting accountability and transparency by public authorities for decisions taken by them,
- Promoting accountability and transparency in the spending of public money,
- Allowing individuals and companies to understand decisions made by public authorities affecting their lives, and
- Bringing to light information affecting public health and safety.

A disadvantage of the FOIA 2000 is that there is no time limit on how long the public authorities have to apply the public interest test. This may delay the disclosure of any information.

If the public authority fail to produce the information within 20 working days, or fail any contact what so ever, the requester can ask the authority to conduct an 'internal review' into such failure or refusal.

The BBC, Channel 4 and S4C were made subject to the FOI Act because they are public service broadcasters. The Act states that disclosure provisions only apply to information they hold 'for purposes other than those of journalism, art or literature'. By protection journalistic material held by these broadcast institutions, the Act does not require them to accept;
- Requests attempting to reveal their journalists' confidential sources, or
- Requests by rival news organisations, or by the subjects of journalistic investigations, attempting to secure disclosure of material gathered in a journalistic investigation, including any footage/audio not broadcast.

Fury at Brown Once Again

Within the Daily Express today, one of the main stories is of 6 soldiers who have died whilst defending our country in Afganistan. These soldiers were not killed whilst fighting though, they were killed by an Afganistan within a secure checkpoint. I cannot even begin to say I can understand how the families of these soldiers are feeling because I've never experienced anything like it. However I know what it feels like to lose a family member and even then I was distraught. So I am thinking of these families, but I have no idea what they're going through.

Whilst reading this story I have found out that Gordon Brown has lost a child himself. He has handwritten a letter of condolence to every family who has lost someone to the war in Afganistan. The mother of a soldier received a letter from Gordon Brown, but was outraged by it.

Due to loss of sight in one eye and deteriorating sight in the other, Brown is unable to fully form the words whilst writing. The mother of the soldier has said that Gordon Brown made numerous spelling mistakes. But this has led to people being angry at Brown for his spelling, when personally I think this is irrelevant at this time. At least he has taken the time to hand write letters to all the families who have suffered a loss, when could of asked someone else to do it and signed at the bottom. I think this has been blown out of proportion and was done simply done to show sympathy to her family.

Week 7 Media Law - Investigative Journalism

To begin with, 'investigative journalism' is where journalists go off the agenda and decide the agenda themselves. This could include subject matter on a lightweight or television or entertainment-led agenda. The 'classic' investigations are based on heavy subjects, and the most common subject of investigative journalism is based on financial topics.
The classic 'off agenda' is miscarriage of justice whereby people are framed and go to jail. The Criminal Cases Review Commission was created in 1995 and has the power to refer to the Court of Appeal any conviction or sentence if the Commission considers there is a real possibility it will be quashed. The right of a convicted prisoner to be visited in jail by a journalist investigating whether there had been a miscarriage of jsutive was upheld in R v Secretary for the Home Department, ex p Simms [1999] 3 All ER 400.
There is an evidence gap between civil and criminal standards of proof. For civil law, the standards of proof are based on the balance of probability, whereas the standard of proof for criminal law has to be beyond reasonable doubt. The Daily Mail's famous branding of five men, suspected of killing the London teenager Stephen Lawrence, as 'murderers' is illustrative of how journalism can operate this gap between civil and criminal law. As this story was not on the agenda, this also illustrates a very effective piece of investigative journalism.
Article 8 of the Convention of Human Rights lays down the law on the right to privacy. It states;
"1) Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life, his home and his correspondence.
2) There shall be no interference by a public authority with the exercise of this right except such as is in accordance with the law and is necessary in a democratic society
-in the interests of national security, public safety or the economic wellbeing of a country,
-for the prevention of disorder or crime,
-for the protection of health or morals, or
-for the protection of the rights and freedom of others."

Journalists were concerned about the right to privacy effecting their freedom to publish true information of public interest. Section 12 of the Human Rights Act states that where a court is considering imposing an unjunction in a matter involving freedom of expression and journalistic, literary or artisic material, it must have particular regard to the extent to which the media defendant has complied with 'any relevant privacy code'.

Breach of confidence is based on the principle that a person who has acquired information in confidence should not take unfair advantage of it. In a new approach to the law of confidence, the questionis whether Article 8 was 'engaged' which depends on whether the information was private. The decision is also based on whether the person claiming had a 'reasonable expectation of privacy'.

The Max Mosley case is an important case in regards to privacy. In this case the News of the World printed the story of the involvement of Max Mosley in a sadomasochistic orgy with five women, claiming that it had a nazi theme. It also put secretly filmed footage on its website. The News of the World's informant was one of the women who had taken part in the sado-masochistic activities. Mr Justice Eady held that the woman informant owed a duty of confidence, as in previous cases where the relationship was transitory. It was said that if the activities had mocked the way in which Jews were treated in concentration camps or parodied Holocaust horror, then there would have been a public interest. The judge could not find a public interest to justify the intrusion, filming or publication.

When investigative journalism is based on celebrity lifestyles or health, the journalists may not have the protection they expected even if the way they obtained and checked the information conformed to the 10 part test set out in the Reynolds case.

Protection of confidential sources of information is the key professional duty of a journalist. Refusal to reveal secret sources of information, however, could lead to prosecution for contempt of court.

An important point which was highly stressed within the lecture today is subterfuge. This means that when interviewing, you have to make it clear that you are a journalist and that you are reporting. Also as a journalist you need to make it known that anything that is said may be published. When recording you must seek consent, and this consent must be explicit. Once consented, almost anything can be published. If there is no consent to the information being published then you will have no evidence, however you may still quote the person interviewed.

Week 6 Media Law - Copyright

This week in media law we have been looking at copyright.

Copyright is a branch of intellectual propertylaw and it protects the products of people's skill, creativity, labour or time. Copyright protects and literary, dramatic, artistic or musical work, sound recording, film, broadcast or typographical arrangement. This was laid done in the Copyright designs and Patents Act 1988. Reproduction of a substantial part of a copyright work may constitute infringement. I found it interesting to note that for a work to be protected by copyright it must satisfy the test of originality. (In othe words, some work or effort must have gone into it.)

In regards to news stories, there is no copyright in facts and information. However, copyright exists in the form of which the information is expressed by the writer and the selection and arrangement of the material as all of these aspects involve skill and labour. Even though there is no copyright in news stories, if someone from another newspaper is persistently taking facts and information from another and rewriting them, that may still be an infringement because there has been skill and labour gone into producing the news story. When reporting current stories, the defence of fair dealing may sometimes allow some quoting from another paper. Fair dealing with a copyright work for the purposes of reporting current events is not an infringement provided it is accompanied by sufficient acknowledgement of the work and its author and provided the work has been made available to the public.

An official of a sporting trade association may find it part of their duty to make material available to the paper free of charge, however the copyright is still the association's and can withdraw the facility, or start to make a charge or prevent another journal from copying it.

It is important to note that copyright material supplied to newspapers by outside contributors will normally be owned by the contributor. For example a photograph. Section 17 of the Copyright Act has laid down that publication without permission of a photograph of the whole or substantial part of a television image is an infringement. Also, those who provide a broadcast service must make information about the programmes available to any newspaper or magazine publisher, wishing to use it, through a licensing scheme. This was established within the Broadcasting Act 1990.

Permission must be sought to publish the whole or part of an artistic work such as a map or drawing.

As soon as speeches are recorded there is copyright in the spoken words, even if they are not delivered from a script. There are four conditions whereby it is not infringement to use the record of words for reporting current events. These are set out in section 58 of the Copyright Act.

1) The record is a direct record and not taken from a previous record or broadcast.

2) The speaker did not prohibit the making of the record and it did not infringe any existing copyright.

3) Theuse being made of the record, or material taken from it, was not of a kind prohibited by the speaker or copyright owner before the record was made.

4) The use being made of the record is with the authority of the person who is lawfully in possession of it.

The first owner of any work is the author, but in the case of work done in the course of employment, the employer is the owner, subject to any contrary agreement. There is no automatic right on the part of a newspaper or magazine or periodical to the copyright of work done by non-members of staff, even if the work has been ordered. The copyright can be assigned to the newspaper or magazine but an assignment is not effective unless in writing signed by the copyright owner.

If a freelance or a commercial photographer has commissioned a photograph, the copyright is owned by the photographer unless there is an agreement to the contrary. A person who commisions a photograph for private or domestic purposes is protected by the Moral Rights section of the Copyright Act. The right in this case is not to have copies of the photograph issued to the public even if he does not own the copyright. Moral rights given to the aurthor of work gives the author right to be identified, not to have their work subject to derogatory treatment and not to have work falsely attributed to him.

Crown Copyright protects civil servants who in the course of their employment have produced work. Crown Copyright has been used in the courts to prevent the publication of material and to threaten former public servants with action for revealing matters concerning their employment.

Disputes have arose between opposing newspapers due to section 30 of the Copyright Act excluding photographs from the defence of fair dealing. These disputes have arose when one paper has lifted photographs from another paper.

It is held that works must be made available to the public. The importance of this is emphasised by changes to copyright law brought about as a result of the implementation of the European Information Society Directive 2001 EC by way of the Copyright and Related Regulations 2003.

Fair dealing does not cover such things as using too much of a work than is necessary when reporting current events.

Copying of a published report is not permitted even though there is no copyright infringement in reporting Parliament, the courts or public inquiries.

An example of infringement of copyright was when The Sun used a still image from a security video showing the lenght of a visit by Princess Diana and Dodi Al Fayed to the villa Windsor. It was held by the Court of Appeal in 2000 to be an infringement of copyright which could not be defended either as a publication in the public interest or as fair dealing for reporting current events.

The Copyright and Patents Act 1988 states that nothing within the Act affects 'any rule of law preventing or restricing the enforcement of copyright on the grounds of public interest or otherwise'. A court would be entitled to refuse to enforce copyright if the work was;

1) Immoral, Scandalous or contrary to family life;

2) Injurious to public life, public health or safety, or the administration of justice; or

3) Incited to encourage others to act in a way injurious to those matters.

There is copyright in the typographical arrangement of newspaper arrangements. However the House of Lords held that a fascimile copy of the cutting of an article from a page which gave no indication of how the rest of the page was laid out was not a substantial part of the published edition and this was not an infringement of the copyright of the typographical arrangement.

The lenght of copyright was ammended by the Government in 1955. The length of copyright now stands at 70 years from the end of the year of the author's death. This decision now confirms with a European Union Directive.

The right of freedom of Expression under article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, was held to provide no defence for infringement of copyright over and above those defences already provided by the Copyright Act 1988.

An example of a remedy for the breach of copyright is 'civil action'. The owner of the copyright can obtain an injuction in the High Court or County court to restrain a person from infringing his copyright as well as seeking damages and an order for the possession of infringing copies of the work and of material used in the infringement.

Prosecution is the punishment for infringement, however this does not apply to journalistic activity.

Innocent infringement is where the infringer did not know and had no reason to believe the work was subject to copyright. In an instance like this the owner is entitled to an amount of profits but not to damages.

If the owner of a copyright work has encouraged or allowed another to make use of that work without complaint, this may destroy a claim for infringement of copyright. This is known as acquiescence.

I've found this blog which provides very useful information about copyright online.

http://copyrightforonline.blogspot.com/

I also found this link about a copyright settlement between Coldplay and Joe Satriani:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/8258217.stm

Journalism Now Piece

The News of the World and Popular Journalism:

The News of the World was first published on October 1st 1843. [1] It was and still remains a Sunday newspaper to which it’s aim is to entertain the working classes. When Sunday newspapers were first introduced, they emphasized that the working people could expect entertainment from their weekly reading, not simply political or didactic instruction.

Around 1850 it was said that journalism was an important means of collecting and communicating social information due to the improvement of technology, distribution and financial stake. However, John Stuart Mill thought differently on the subjected and stated:
"…Our daily and weekly writers are the lowest hacks of literature which…is the vilest and most degrading of all trades because more of affectation and hypocrisy and more subservience to the basest feelings of others are necessary for carrying it on…from that of a brothel-keeper." [2]

This viewpoint on journalism did not prevent the News of the World from becoming an extremely popular Sunday newspaper. It was not until the Stamp Duties were abolished that the News of the World became one of three Sunday newspapers to dominate in the era of mass readerships and the New Journalism. The other two weekly newspaper launched around the same time were, the Lloyd’s Illustrated London Newspaper and Reynolds’ Weekly Newspaper.
The News of the World had a compelling impact on popular journalism due to the content of its pages. Popular Journalism is that which discovers stories of entertaining value for its readers, associating itself with gossip, celebrity scandals, news and sensation. The News of the World appealed to its targeted audience, the working classes, because it concerned itself with these topics ensuring its aims were always achieved. It’s headlines and pictures are always capturing to their readership and its sensationalism illustrates why, on its launch, it claimed to be, ‘The Novelty of the Nations and the Wonder of the World – the cheapest, largest and best newspaper’. Being one of many ‘Red Tops’, readers of the News of the World are aware that their weekly read is not going to be strongly political or extremely educational because ‘Red Top’ newspapers are associated with popular culture rather than high culture and therefore lower market.

The News of the World had a circulation of 6,250,000 in the 1960’s due to the breaking news of the Profumo Affair. Within this story it was revealed that the Conservative Secretary of State John Profumo and Yevgeny Ivanov were sharing the prostitute, Christine Keeler. This story reinforced the radicalism of the newspaper. [3] A way in which the News of the World stands out from other ‘Red Tops’ is with its anti-paedophile campaign. This began in 2000 after the case of Sarah Payne, to which the newspaper wanted to name paedophiles to the public in an attempt to shame them. This controversial campaign led to dangerous acts towards suspected paedophiles by members of the public. The campaign was dropped after it was said to be ‘grossly irresponsible’. Although in this case the News of the World is seen as individual, there is an aspect which presents it differently.

The fact that this Sunday newspaper is now a subsidiary of the Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation suggests it is no longer one of a kind, which reinforces its association with popular culture as it is now part of mass media.


[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/News_of_the_World
[2]Journalism - A Critical History Martin Conboy
[3]Journalism - A Critical History Martin Conboy

Confidentiality - Media Law Week 5

This week we were looking at the concept of ‘confidentiality’ within media law. There are three main areas within this topic: State Secrets, Commercial Secrets and Privacy.
State secrets are also known as official secrets, which will come from the military or intelligence operations for example. The law on state secrets is set out within the Official Secrets Act 1911. This contains schedules of secret information and revealing any information can lead to criminal prosecution. Reporting from a military base can be dangerous and lead to an Official Secrets Act breach because a story could give away (directly or indirectly) the disposition of troops.
In common law people have the right to keep secrets so long as this is not against the public interest. If a secret has been passed on when it has not been permitted to do so, the crime is called ‘breach of confidence’. An example of this is where a doctor passed on confidential information about you to a family member when you have given consent for such action to take place.
As journalists we may be inclined to provoke someone to reveal a secret, however if we do so and then publish the secret we may have committed a ‘third party breach of confidence’. ‘Confidentiality’ partly depends on the type of secret information at stake, and partly on the expectation of the person imparting the information that it will be kept a secret. The information being passed on must have the necessary quality of confidence to which it cannot be already known; it must have been provided in circumstances imposing an obligation; there cannot have been consent and detriment must be likely to be caused to the person who gave the information. These aspects must all be present in order for there to be a breach of confidence.
When starting some new jobs the employer will go through what is known as a ‘gagging clause’. A ‘gagging clause’ is a clause set out in the employment contract of an employee. It prevents the employee from discussing certain details considered important or sensitive with third parties. If someone has a ‘gagging clause’ they are taking a risk in speaking to a journalist about their company without permission.
Different professions require different amounts of confidentiality. Doctors have to keep all information, which patients have disclosed, to themselves. The only time they are permitted to share such information is if the patient has given their consent. If the doctor passes on information, for example, but they have not received consent then they are in breach of confidence. Journalists can also be guilty of a third party breach of confidence in this circumstance as well, if they have then published or broadcast the information, which was not consented.
Section eight of the Human Rights Act regards itself with privacy of family life. This is the third area to ‘personal secrets’. This clause mainly affects tabloid newspapers and celebrity journalism. We have a right to publish photographs of celebrities in various situations if we have consent and if there is a public interest, however if there is lack of consent we do not have the right to publish the photographs.
The next aspect of this topic is injunctions. An injunction is an equitable remedy in the form of a court order whereby a party is required to do or refrain from doing certain acts. In relation to journalism, a person or company can easily get an injunction to prevent a secret about them from being published or broadcasted. Injunctions are easily obtained because that person will say there is a danger of a crime occurring and the injunction will prevent that crime. Looking at it from a public view point, an injunction is a positive thing because once an injunction has been made against one media organisation, it is an injunction against all publishers.
The final aspect of this topic is celebrities and privacy. The rule regarding this is, if there is a picture of a person in your newspaper/TV station website, make sure you know who they are, what they are doing and whether they have consented to having their picture taken and published.
　

Qualified Privilege

There is a law which exists to protect the moral and professional reputation of the individual from unjustified attack. This is defamation. Defamatory statements are those that; expose the person to hatred, ridicule or contempt; cause the person to be shunned or avoided; lower the person in the estimation of right-thinking members of society generally or disparge the person in his/her business, trade, office or profession. There are two types of defences for the charge of defamation which are, absolute and qualified privilege. Privilege is a defence against an action for libel which attaches to reports produced from certain events, documents or statements.

The defense of qualified privilege permits persons in positions of authority or trust to make statements or relay or report statements that would be considered slander and libel if made by anyone else. As a journalist if you are reporting in Parliament or courts you have a defence of qualified privilege automatically when repeating, publishing, or broadcasting defamatory remarks. In order to have the defence of qualified privilege, you must have published something immediately with no errors or malice. (Fast, accurate and fair.) Absolute privilege is not available to journalists, however if, in practice, your report is free from error and if it is published immediately then the qualified privilege confers a similar degree of protection.
If, as a journalist, you are attending a public event such as a local government meeting, then the defence of qualified privilege is available to you, just as long as you allow the defamed person to deny allegations in the same report.
The other point which is very important in regards to the defence of qualified privilege is the Reynold's 10 point test for journalists. The 10 point test was established in the case of Albert Reynolds vs The Sunday Times. In this case the Sunday Times stated that the Irish Prime Minister (Ablert Reynolds) lied to the Irish Parliament in order to cover up a child abuse scandal in the Catholic Church. The paper could not prove the allegations when challenged by Reynolds as they had no witnesses and no evidence. However, when the case went before the higher courts, the judges stated that the Sunday Times had not only a right but a duty to publish the allegations because they seemed to be reasonable and it was in the public interest to be published. The 10 points that were established as a result of this test are:
1) The seriousness of the allegation.
2) The nature of the information.
3) The source of the information.
4) The steps taken to verify the information.
5) The status of the information.
6) The urgency of the matter.
7) Whether the 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, including the timing.

If a journalist covers all 10 points of the Reynolds Test and they have the public interest, then they may have a qualified privilege in making defamatory allegations outright without quoting someone who is protected by absolute privilege.

This is an interesting case of qualified privilege:
Connecticut Supreme Court Limits Employer's Qualified Privilege in Defamation Actions:
http://www.jacksonlewis.com/legalupdates/article.cfm?aid=1730

Yesterday's Mail

There were a couple of things that concerned me within yesterday's Daily Mail.
The first was, "What a way to treat our heroes". It was so shocking to believe that teenagers, or people in general for that matter, can be so disrespectful towards people who have died fighting for our country. A 19-year-old lad urinated on a memorial wreath laid down but a soldier's family, whilst drunk on a night out. He is said to be making a public apology to family members of the soilder but I don't think this is enough. Regardless of whether or not he was drunk he was aware of what he was doing, enough so to aim specifically for the memorial wreath. I know that our culture has changed significantly in comparison to say my parent's childhood, but when did this become acceptable or funny?
The other story that I found hard to understand was, "How could any mother have been so callous?" A son of eight was confined to a wheelchair and eventually hooked to a drip after his mother made him undergo countless surgical procedures in order for her to reap the benefits. Why would a mother be so evil just for money? Does it really mean that much?

Madness

How can Gordon Brown be making promises to get our country out of this recession if he played a huge part in getting us into it? It has been announced that he paid £6,500 over 26 months through his brother for a cleaner who worked for both of them. However, now our Prime Minister is introducing a firesale of national assests such as the Tote, student loans, the Channel Tunnel rail link and a Thame river crossing, in an attempt to pay off Britain's huge deficit. I find it amusing that he can spend a large amount of money himself on just a cleaner and expect money from the Dartford crossing to provide money to pay off the deficit.


It was emphasised today that there is a huge difference between comment and fact when reporting stories. Fair Comment is a defence for libel so long as a journalist makes it clear that what was said was in fact a comment as oppose to fact. 'Comment is cheap - fact is priceless'. Journalists can say hurtful or controversial things due to the principle of 'freedom of speech'. The word 'fair' however means the honest opinion of the journalist which does not make it balanced or moderate.
Libel is made up of three apsects:
1) Defamation
2) Publication
3) Identification
A statement is defamatory if it lowers the repuation of someone, so as to expose them to hatred; cause them to be shunned or avoided; discredit them in their trade or business or generally lower them in the eye of right minded people.
The test for indentification is whether the defamatory statement would lead people acquainted with him/her to believe that they are the person being referred to.
The piece must have been published to which it must have been communicated with at least one other person.
The most important defence for libel is Justification. This is a complete defence if the statement is true and you can prove it with witnesses, who would be prepared to appear in court because you must not only believe it to be true but you must be able to prove it. For the defence of justification to be successful, the matter must be proved on 'the balance of probabilities'.
A libel case was won in April this year by a woman with the same name as Sacha Baron Cohen's fictional girlfriend in Ali G. Here's the link if you wanna take a look...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/apr/22/ali-g-libel-win

Criminal Proceedings

All criminal cases in England and Wales begin in the Magistrates Court. Indictable-only offences such as; murder, manslaughter and aiding suicide, must be sent for trial at the Crown Court.
Offences such as; assault occasioning actual bodily harm and wounding or inflicting GBH are either-way offences and can be tried summarily at the Magistrates Court or sent for trial at the Crown Court. This decision is down to the evidence and the seriousness of the offence. If a case does get sent to the Crown Court, a jury trial will take place.
To prevent potential jurors from being influenced by reporters, there are restrictions as to what can be reported. The following aspects are what can be reported about an active case; name and age, address and occupation, charge(s), date and place of court hearing, bail and legal aid conditions and the names of counsel.

This is the main proceedings we need to know for the law exam in December.

In the Guardian today there was the story of Anton Du Beke from Strictly Come Dancing, who is said to have made a racist remark about his dance partner. He stated she looked like a 'paki' because she was wearing fake tan. I understand completely that the term 'paki' is racist and should not be used but I do think the whole political correctness thing in this country has gone too far. He was at risk of losing his job for something he meant as merely a joke. My question is, would it have been worth it just for the sake of being politically correct. He was not intending to be rude, he was joking with someone who he had been bantering with previously.

Our Society is Getting Worse

I can't even begin to understand how people can be so sick. How could Vanessa George treat children that way. Her profession would suggest that she is there to aid children's learning and help working parents by offering a service of child minding. But in effect she has caused much more harm than good. She must have traumatised those children, who she is refusing to name. Plus, she has probably caused so much hurt, anger and indescribable pain to the parents of those children, which becomes even more shocking to think that this is from a mother herself!! I just hope that she receives a sentence that reflects what she has caused.
Another issue I have with society is the fact that people can cause such pain and show no remorse. Headline in 'The Sun' today reads; 'Girl sees brother, 10 die in hit-run crash'. The boy was on his way home from the cinema when he was hit by a transit van. To which the driver abandoned the vehicle at the scene. My question is, how can people be so cruel as to leave the family of this boy, unaware of who caused their pain? They are being selfish not thinking of the people picking up the pieces. I really don't understand how people can be so cruel.


Moving on...I was reading through the Mc Nae's Law for Journalists and was intrigued to find that Causing Death by Careless or Inconsiderate Driving is an Either-way offence. (Which means; one triable either summarily at Magistrates Court or before a jury at a Crown Court.) I realise this is still very serious, however assault, common assault, battery and assault by beating are all either-way offences also. Does this mean in some way the cases are likely to be treated in the same way or is this simply 'the' proceedure to follow? I only ask because causing death by careless driving is, in effect murder, which is an indictable-only offence. I regard both of these offences as the unlawful killing of another human being. I guess the difference between them is the mens rea within each offence; murder is seen to be 'with malice aforethought', however the defendant who caused death by careless or inconsiderate driving, may not have had the intention to kill.

Highest Court in the Land Opens Today!!!

The Supreme Court officially opened today! It has been said however that the judges within the Supreme Court are due to be faced with scrutiny regarding who they are and their backgrounds...is this right? Maybe, because when the House of Lords was the highest court within the UK the public were unaware of the Law Lords and may have held biased opinions of them based on romours they had heard. But the judges from the Supreme Court have under gone a selection process to which they have been questionned very closely in regards to their political choice and their interests. Due to the public, for the first time, being able to observe cases by broadcasts and watch the judges at work, I think people should have concern for the characteristics of these judges within the highest court.

In The Times today Lord Phillips stated that; ‘the object [of the Supreme Court] is to give formal effect to an important constitutional principle – separation of powers, by transferring the function of the highest court from technically being a function carried out by Parliament, to a function carried out by a court of judges’.

Although I do believe the Supreme Court will have many advantages, I do wonder if this change will bring any advantages to the law itself.

Introduction to Journalism

Understanding what philosophy had to do with a BA Journalism course has made aspects clearer to me. As journalists we question every aspect of a story, yet in order to question something we should know where ideas and questioning were first exercised.
Within his book, ‘History of Western Philosophy’, Russell stated, ‘it is not what the man finds that distinguishes him, but why and how he believes it’. Copernicus believed that the sun was the centre of the universe and that the earth had a twofold motion. However, Tycho Brahe held that the sun and the moon orbit the earth but the planets orbit the sun. Both philosophers must have had reason to believe what they did.

I find it interesting to note that journalists have the capacity and responsibility to enhance democratic debate because only a minority of people can participate directly in discussions and decisions which affect society, so it is therefore journalists’ responsibility to alert and inform the public about matters of importance.

Journalists have a convention to follow to which Article 10 is the most important. This article states that ‘everyone has a right to freedom of expression’, to which their right to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas will not be interfered by authorities. However, journalists exercising their rights should be aware of Article 8 within the same convention, which is based on privacy being protected, as this will effectively argue against them.