Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘media’

 

This essay was written for my Global Media and Communication module, handed in 9/12/11, with a final mark of 63%.

Introduction

The existing media system operating in the Czech Republic is representative of the strides forward the country has taken since the shadowed past of pre-Velvet Revolution and Velvet Divorce, in 1989 and 1993 respectively. Politically, the country has a Presidential system and a Prime Minister-led Parliament. This is a clear indicator of the country’s determination to be an autonomous state since the fall of communism. The President that oversees the government is a political hangover of the communist regime; a leader with powers to overrule. The media system is a combination of a public broadcaster, mainly funded by the government, and a free system built on private ownership. This promotes competition, an attribute of capitalism in the United States of America that the general public wanted to recreate. This case study looks at how the Authoritarian theory as promulgated by Siebert, Peterson and Schramm in 1956 still influences aspects of the Czech print media system after the country tried so hard to remove itself from Soviet rule.

 

The Czech press and its governance

In 2001 the Czech Republic was the first country of the former Soviet occupied states to review their original media policy. After the fall of communism in 1989, media legislation proved such a low priority in comparison to the creation of a new government that the press simply began a form of self-regulation (Gulyás 2003: 85). When the country divorced from the Slovak Republic in 1993, the Press Act created was largely similar to the framework still in use today, one that promoted freedom with no regulation regarding foreign ownership. The state amended the original Press Act, managed by the Ministry of Culture, in 2000. It still clearly denotes the freedom of the press in Section 4. This entire section is summed up in one line of text: “The content of a periodical lies with the editor” (Klaus et. al. 2000)

Major restrictions include regulation on defamation. This is covered in Section 10. It states that if “communications containing factual allegations which touches the honour, dignity or privacy of certain individuals”, the affected can ask for a repeal or a response from the editor to be printed within 30 days. This section has caused the most controversy.

The general public tends to be of the opinion that attaching legislation to regulate the press largely devalues what the country fought for during the demise of Soviet power. Regulation goes precisely against the societal beliefs of what the free press should be. There was public outrage in 1994 when a journalist, Zdenek Svavorky, was arrested and jailed for four months when he described the President, Vaclav Havel as a “traitor” (Wachtal 1996).

The current political leaders have long had a widely publicised loathing of journalists, which has in many cases been duly reciprocated. If the level of detest is so high then why don’t the political leaders impose more restrictions on the media?

There would be, without doubt, absolute disgust on behalf of the public should stricter legislation be introduced, but I would argue another reason: The government tolerates the way the media system operates because it is ultimately the decision of Czech leaders to provide a ‘free’ press. Allowing the public to express their views in a newspaper can in itself be seen as a form of regulation.  Adorno and Horkheimer explain; “there is the agreement of all executive authorities, not to produce or sanction anything that in any way differs from their own rules, their own ideas about consumers, or above all themselves” (1944: 122).

The Czech government supports a system that is intended to allow private ownership and public body broadcasters to work in unison. This bicameral approach is represented in practice in all sectors of the media apart from the newspaper industry.

According to Metykova and Cisařová the current mixture of journalists is divided between those working before the fall of communism and those who came in to the profession following the Velvet Revolution and Divorce. These two types of journalist have opposing ideologies on what their role is in society.

 – Pre 1989

The journalists that survived the cold war reported a huge cultural change in their country. Despite this experience they seem to have developed a hangover of the journalism practices drummed into them by their previous leaders. The job they fulfilled was one that spoke for the government and provided information and structure to the daily order. “The ‘old’ generation identify themselves as the bearers of (arguably idealized) professional standards and professional integrity and pride”. (Metykova &Cisařová 2009: 733)

 – Post 1989

The modern journalist, or at least those who began working after the fall of communism, are far more aggressive in their attempts to undermine the government at any opportunity. The general feeling amongst them is that they now have the freedom to speak out against the government so they will. (Sparks 1998:  162)

The political leaders tend to take these criticisms personally; consequently they have let their feeling for journalists be known. In an interview with Forbes magazine in 1994, the Prime Minister, Vaclav Klaus stated, “journalists are the biggest enemies of mankind” (Gulyás, 2003: 87).

We can take a clear element of distaste shared between the two sides from this quote but Sparks argues that Klaus and other politicians later developed a collaborative relationship with many media outputs, especially TV Nova. The leading commercial Czech television station used these links with politicians to lobby for and achieve changes to media legislation. In exchange for this, the media diluted their hostility toward the country’s leaders (2000: 43). Therefore, as is the case under the authoritarian model, the government achieves support from the press without formal regulation.

Newspapers are under private ownership and must abide by the Press Act. This Act now falls under the terms of the Competition Law of the European Commission, as does the regulation of the rest of the media. The Competition Law says that it regulates “(i) cartels, (ii) abuse of a dominant position and (iii) merger control” (Hoffman 2005: 4). The Antimonopoly Office ensures that the terms of the legislation are followed by taking in to account the specific roles of each publication and investigating media convergences. The media is seen as a vital role in Czech culture, which is “viewed as a ticket to the future”. (Jehlička 2008)

 

Other theories the Czech press may fit into

Some may argue that 4 Theories of the Press is the Bible of media theory but many modern theorists have started to lose faith. There are already suggestions of a fifth, Development theory that applies to peripheral countries, as well as modern combinations of the original four.

Sparks (1998) concludes that the 4 Theories of the Press is a completely useless tool to benchmark the Czech media system against. This is true to an extent.

The Soviet-Communist system is obsolete as the current system was set up to directly oppose the purpose of a Soviet press.

With the press being free, perhaps the Libertarian theory offers a connection, yet the Czech Republic definitely maintains a solid government.

The Social-Responsibility theory does reflect elements of the Czech system. The Czech Press Act gives the impression of a free press, but its official legislation in Section 10 regarding defamation, and the jail sentence of Svavorky, proves otherwise. The media ownership also negotiates too many underhand deals with the government in order to influence freedom and legislation for this theory to fully apply to the Czech system. The media moguls Vladimír Železný and Ronald Lauder of TV Nova have proven that the Czech media owners are savvy enough to persuade the government to work in their favour, indicating self-interest rather than social-responsibility. The press doesn’t have a Czech media tycoon, as German or Swiss publishers own the majority of papers. Právo is the only Czech-owned newspaper. It is the second biggest broadsheet and not strong enough in power to broker deals with the government similar to it’s broadcast colleagues. In the absence of such deals, print journalists have no reason to dilute their antagonism towards the government. Notions of social-responsibility certainly do not encourage them to present a balanced view.

The Czech media system is a complex mix of journalistic practices from the old regime, the new revolutionists, the media moguls and the stubborn governance.

Such a hybrid of ambitious powers jockeying for position in this still young country can cause theorists to jump to conclusions when discussing which theory best describes its press.

With its private ownership, and the part control of broadcasting by the government it is the Authoritarian theory that still holds true. Despite Hitler’s control of the media, privately run newspapers faired rather well under Nazi rule. Alfred Hugenburg owned a successful paper that went largely uninterrupted in its choice of content (Sparks 1998: 40). It was taken over by the regime toward the end of WWII to ensure support for the cause but for the most part it was left to choose its own content. One thing the Authoritarian theory relies on is strict support for the government in power; the Czech press have very little belief in their leadership, but the theory should not be thrown out over such minor details. This lack of belief does not necessarily destroy the application of this theory. Adorno and Horkheimer argue that the emotion achieved after the consumption of culture remains the same, regardless of the political system. “Consumers appear as statistics on research organization charts and are divided by income groups into red, green and blue areas; the technique is that used for any type of propaganda.” (1944: 123).

 

 

 

Conclusion

Applying the arguably outdated Authoritarian theory to the press system of the Czech Republic is a questionable choice that will undoubtedly draw critics. That doesn’t mean it should be disregarded.

The Controlled Commodification theory has revitalised the concepts of self-regulation and state control. It is tough to argue without hesitance that the media system in China is entirely under control of the state, and the same can be said for self-regulation. The combined theory shows that both aspects have relevance (Weber & Lu 2007).

Just as Controlled Commodification developed from two ideas, for this reason I believe the Authoritarian theory may still be of use when analysing today’s Czech press. Although the theory cannot stand by itself when describing the current system, for reasons I have stated, its utility could combine with a second, or even third, theory after more specific examination. Due to the limitations of this article I am unable to expand much further than stating a prospective amalgamation with the Social-Responsibility theory.

Examples of the government looking after their own principles, and the media expressing their freedom demonstrate that it would be best to submit a Socially-Responsible Authoritarian media theory. As further research is needed of the two archaic systems, this is yet to be confirmed. What is clear from my study is that with the government’s attempts to control the broadcasting system, and the more relaxed attitude toward the newspaper industry, the Authoritarian theory should still be considered when describing the Czech Press.

 

References:

Adorno, T. Horkheimer, M. (1994) ‘The Culture Industry: Enlightenment As Mass Deception’ Dialectic of Enlightenment: 120 – 167, Norfolk: Lowe & Brydon Printers Ltd

Gulyás, Á. (2003) ‘Print Media in Post-Communist East Central Europe’, European Journal Of Communication (18) 1: 81

Hoffmann, T. Fucik, J. Institute of European Media Law (2005) ‘Chapter 3: Czech Republic’, Market Definitions in the Media Sector [online] available from <http://ec.europa.eu/competition/sectors/media/documents/&gt; [26 November 2011]

Jehlička, V. (2008) National Cultural Policy of the Czech Republic, Prague: Government of the Czech Republic

Klaus. Havel. Zeman. (2000) ‘Regulation No. 46/2000/Předpisy č. 46/2000’ Collection of Laws/Sbírka zákonů, [online] available from <http://www/sagit.cz.pages.sbirkatxt.asp?zdroj=sb00046&cd=76&typ=r&gt; [5 December 2011] (Translated via Google Translator)

Metyková, M. Císařová, L. (2009) ‘Changing journalistic practices in Eastern Europe’, Journalism, (10) 5: 719-736

Siebert, F.S. Peterson, T. Schramm, W. (1956) Four Theories of the Press, Urbana: University of Illinois

Sparks, C. (2000) ‘Media theory after the fall of European communism: Why the old models from East and West won’t do any more’, Curran, J., Park, M. De-Westernizing Media Studies, London: Routledge, 35-49

Sparks, C. Reading, A. (1998) Communism, Capitalism and the Mass Media. London: SAGE Publications

Wachtel, B. 1996, ‘Czech media: Democratic or anti-communist?’ Nieman Reports (50) 2: 51.

Weber, I. Lu, J. (2007) ‘Internet and self-regulation in China: the cultural logic of controlled commodification’ Media, Culture and Society (29) 5: 772-789

Read Full Post »

My mother is of that generation that circulated emails are still forwarded on to the family and friends in her contact list, she’s wonderful. I love her because in many ways she’s still amazingly youthful, even if she does catch on to the tail end of trends, but she doesn’t do it in an annoying way. Or is that just my bias?

She recently copied and pasted this into her Facebook status. Its probably not her original work but I thought it was worth sharing.

 

Such a good rant I had to share: Anyone age approx 35 or over should read this – copied from a friend … Checking out at the supermarket recently, the young cashier suggested I should bring my own bags because plastic bags weren’t good for the environment. I apologised and explained, “We didn’t have this green thing back in my earlier days”. the clerk responded, “That’s our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations”. She was right about one thing–our generation didn’t have the green thing in “Our” day. So what did we have back then? After some reflection and soul-searching on “Our” day here’s what I remembered we did have…. Back then, we returned milk bottles, pop bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles repeatedly. So they really were recycled. But we didn’t have the green thing back in our day. We walked up stairs, because we didn’t have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn’t have the green thing in our day. Back then, we washed the baby’s nappies because we didn’t have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy gobbling machine burning up 240 volts — wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days. Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right. We didn’t have the green thing back in our day. Back then, we had one TV, or radio, in the house –not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of Wales. In the kitchen, we blended & stirred by hand because we didn’t have electric machines to do everything for us. When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap. Back then, we didn’t fire up an engine and burn petrol just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power. We exercised by working so we didn’t need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she’s right. We didn’t have the green thing back then. We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blades in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. But we didn’t have the green thing back then. Back then, people took the bus, and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their mums into a 24-hour taxi service. We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn’t need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 2,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest pizza joint. But isn’t it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we older folks were just because we didn’t have the green thing back then? Please post this on your Facebook profile so another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smarty-pants young person can read this 😮

Read Full Post »

As this term draws to a close our last Global Media lecture meant we weren’t learning about new theories or concepts and focused on looking at a number of programmes that discussed ones we’d learned in previous weeks.

The programme titled Hollow State produced in December 1996 looked at the information society developing in China at the time.

An interesting thought process is if the hollowness has increased or decreased over the years. Has culture and society caught up with the information society and developed with it? Or has it become more hollow as the information technology of today develops at such a rate that we are constantly behind the trend or latest revelation.

The programme brought to light some of the academic theorists we have seemingly studied over the past few weeks. This shows that the journalist making the programme will use the theorists when discussing certain developments and the latest news. It’s important to develop contacts with the people I study with currently as these may be the people I’m interviewing in a few years time.

Hollow State was particularly well made due to the different views it offered. It’s a good visual example of how to construct the essay due to be handed in next week. It presented the views opposing the programmes theory and gave examples of why it may be true, as well as the views the programme believed with examples.

 

Read Full Post »

With the week I’ve had, Genevieve and I managed to miss each other at every opportunity to plan our presentation for today’s seminar. The presentation, although not marked, is supposed to take a view at how we are getting on in the process of our essay writing. So far I haven’t got anywhere, as the link will explain.

We managed to meet a few hours before our lecture to throw together a quick presentation. As my lecture notes had disappeared this was a tougher process than it could have been.

We spent the first half hour teaching one another about the country we will be discussing in our essay and the theories behind our essay. We then put together a few slides just to support our speech.

While our presentation was a clear example of how we were under-prepared, we both managed to explain ourselves in a manner that meant we could get some good constructive feedback.

When I begin writing my essay, I now have four questions that I need to focus on.

1)   What is the media policy?

2)   Is it executed?

3)   Which of the ‘4 theories of the press’ does it fit into?

4)   How does post-traumatic journalism/post communism theory fit into it?

I will be writing about the print media system in the Czech Republic. The media policy I have yet to research, but that is my next main focus. I have done plenty of theoretical research so far so as soon as I read the official policy I should know whether the Czech print media are executing it effectively.

A holy grail when it comes to Central European media theory

Whilst I will argue that the system currently operating doesn’t fit into any of the 4 theories (citing Sparks & Reading 1998), I will suggest that it most closely fits into the libertarian theory.

This argument will then lead e on to the idea of Post Traumatic Journalism, or in the case of the Czech Republic, post-communism.

Overall it was a very helpful exercise, I also noted down a few pointers that Fred and the class suggested we include so I have some further reading to do, but hopefully I should be in a position to start the essay by the end of next week.

 

Read Full Post »

This week’s Global Media and Communication seminar focused on our next piece of work. The fact that I have barely begun my first piece of work is unsettling. This is the level of speed and efficiency you have to work at to develop at an MA level.

The second piece of coursework is a choice of six questions, of which we have to explore and write up the answer with of course references to the various theories and concepts behind Global Media.

One such question that caught my eye was the second that asks me to ‘Discuss the argument that media and communication have democratic value with reference to a specific political phenomenon or event of global interest, such as controversial occurrence or landmark election in a country of your choice’.

The bonus of this particular assignment is that is doesn’t have to be entirely written. There are a number of options available to how I wish to approach the execution of this. An idea I have had is to create a 10-minute podcast of the subject and write the additional 1000 word review. I could possibly write a 3000-word article and review but as my previous lecturers know my academic writing isn’t the best. I am more practical and I should embrace it given the opportunity, this type of product will also prove useful toward a portfolio down the line.

One of many books edited by John Mair inspired by his famed Coventry Conversations

With regards to the subject I may look at the answer in relation to The Arab Spring. This could be done as the podcast will need to be put together quite quickly and John Mair has already written a book about the Arab Spring and how the globalisation of media has affected its success. I will hopefully be able to include him in the podcast and maybe some other opinions to back up my points.

The rest of the essay was completed with the discussion of Conflict and Persuasive communication, in particular the roles of propaganda and how peace journalism is reported.

Whereas Propaganda is heavily planned, selective and can influence general opinion through emotion, Peace journalism focuses on the needs of ordinary people and with finding a solution to their problems.

For next weeks lecture I’ll look at a text titled ‘Embedding and the Geneva Convention’ in preparation, but will need to book some time with Genevieve, a colleague who I will be completing my presentation with next week.

Read Full Post »

Due to the complicated and political way in which the UK media sector is built the people that may indeed own a company doesn’t necessarily mean they run it. The British media is separated into two main categories; public service broadcasting; privately owned media corporations.

The former is the dominant broadcaster in Britain. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is a company that the public can choose to pay for (a legal requirement if they receive and watch a television transmission), but it is not paid for through a tax system unlike many other national publicly funded broadcasters. Due to this unique funding method the BBC is ruled by an elected official – the Director General who will have other Directors elected around him. These Directors are appointed by the BBC Trust – made up of 12 members who ensure what is being broadcast is of general public interest.

Despite the initial simplicity of the BBC’s structure, the Governmental Department of Media, Culture and Sport influences the BBC’s choice of material and has a great amount of control over BBC3, a channel that orientates itself toward the British youth.

Ofcom (Office of Communications) is a government office that also plays a role in allowing what is, or is not to be broadcast. They challenge certain programmes if they are deemed to violent, sexual, and adjust the watershed appropriately.

Ofcom also governs what can be broadcast on commercial television. ITV is the UK’s biggest commercial broadcaster, it is owned by stakeholders and shareholders but the Chairman and the Board of Directors manage the company.

ITV, along with every other commercial station will also have to adhere to Terms and Conditions set by Ofcom. Even BSkyB, has to show impartiality whereas it’s US sister-station Fox offers a notoriously biased service (Wring, 2005, p.2).

Traditionally media barons own the majority of the press, but this idea is still relevant today. Lord Beaverbrook came to Britain and started the Daily Express that became the biggest selling newspaper in the world after the World War 2. Lord Rothermere owned the Daily Mail and the General Trust like his father before him and as his son does now.

The British press have been separate to the Government and can be seen as the voice of the public. They can sometimes end up being political actors and influence the government’s decisions, especially if there is outrage or demand for more information or a change in law.

Often the press can bend to the will of the government however and join their side. A good example is Rupert Murdoch’s sway of allegiance from Margaret Thatcher to Tony Blair during the 1980’s and 90’s.

Rupert Murdoch is a good example of a ‘modern-day’ mogul despite his age. He has built an enterprise across two continents. It will be tough for him to continue building much further into Europe however, due to EU Competition Law he will struggle to become the dominant media owner (Trappel & Meier, 1998, ch. 12). This is also inhibiting his attempt at increasing his share in BskyB.

The ownership of British media can be simply but who runs it contains many different arguments. The public service is a self-run operation with an idea to inform, educate and entertain the public, but the government has it’s say in media, culture, sport and youth. It also runs the office that has supreme power over whether or not images should be aired. Even the press has to answer to the Dept. of Trade and Industry and while many see the people that make money from the newspapers, they are advised and left to operate under the government’s watchful eye to ensure they are able to keep running. “Critics have suggested Murdoch’s conversion was less about politics and more about defending his business interests from government scrutiny” (Wring, 2005, p.6).

 

Bibliography:

TRAPPEL, J. MEIER, WERNER A.Trappel,(1998) ‘Media Concentration and the public interest’. in Media Policy: Convergence, Concentration and Commerce. ed. by Siune, K. McQuail, D. London: SAGE Publications, 38-59

WRING, D. (2005) Media ownership and British politics in Politics Review, 14/15, pp. 28-31

 

Read Full Post »

We began Friday afternoon by reviewing an event that took place earlier in the week. It was a debate linking to the launch of John Mair‘s new book Mirage in the Desert? Reporting the Arab Springto be released on 26th of October. One that we were offered to attend but unfortunately due to previous work commitments I was unable to.

By reviewing what they talked about at the book launch we were able to touch on a few key issues regarding global media and communication.

Initially we were asked what are the practicalities that journalists face when covering controversial overseas issues?

The answer to this brought up several points.

·      It is necessary to keep sending media out to war torn places when there are already so many on the ground?

·      Should the focus of the stories be on the families and the people rather than how many bombs have dropped?

·      It is imprtant to provide background information rather than opinion.

·      Safety comes at a high price when journalists are following tanks and troops.

·      Thr fiscal price to send these people away is so high when it includes camera crews, satellite mobiles.

We also looked at what theories we can apply to these points.

·      With so many different, often opposing press and broadcast teams reporting the competition may lead to a downfall in the standards of reports i.e. BBC vs Sky vs ITV (John Mair’s notes highlighted these Commercialisation aspects)

John Mair has written a collection of books inspired by Coventry Conversations

·      The idea of embedding a journalist in a troop can lead to problems because no writer will write negatively about a troop they are travelling with. This could lead to the press not being trusted and kicked off the tour.

This work led to a discussion and some in class research about how athe media can seemingly lose a war. When you look at research of the Vietnam war, one point that crops up is how the US press played such a heavy role in reporting every negative detail of what went on. Some theorists believe that despite the US winning the war, it was shown to have been lost through the eyes of the media that the US lost the war.

The second half ot eh lecture was reviewing the tasks set the week previous. I personally looked at McPhail’s Global Comunication (2005) and reviewed this to the class but this week I have elected to look at Media Concentration Options for Policy by Trapper and Meier in McQuail and Siune (1998).

In addition to this I have begun focusing on our homework assignment for this week about who owns the media in my country. A review will be posted later this week.

Read Full Post »

As part of my Global Media and Communciation module I’m looking at Global Communication – Theories, Stakeholders and Trends McPhail (2006).

Global Communication proves and interesting read

McPhail proves to be quite a controversial and potentially obnoxious writer is some respects. Certainly in the opening chapter ‘Global Communication’ the book takes on the viewpoint of the United States and how the media marketplace changed post-9/11. Quite often it is implied that the exact same changes in media systems and reporting practices were executed in the United Kingdom and the rest of mainland Europe.Whilst many practices may run parallel the countries discussed can be quite different.

Throughout chapters 1 and 2 there are some fine points made but the view that NWICO (New World Information and Communication Order) seems to be the only alternative to the free press systems that the US prefers needs further investigation. While NWICO’s values may indeed be outdated, there needs to be other theories explored as the current Westernised free press system may indeed be unfair to the ‘peripheral nations’.

There have been attempts to implement profitable mediums in less developed countries with little success, and a lot of this has been due to more traditional systems in place being unable to support the required change to perform at a high level. There are also such problems as some nations resisting these practices due to the current print press working as it is and there being strict rules against free opinion, particularly in countries that may still be ruled by dictatorship. In these cases Development Journalism is instilled as many of these countries believe they can ‘catch up’ to leading nations by doing so

.This may be a good point to explore. McPhail highlighted a quote by a US economist Walter Rostow “Moderizations occur when necessary conditions for change are established”. If a country doesn’t require or need to catch up to the modern technological advances that pervade Western media then why should they? These countries will slowly build their own media systems up to the point that they will be good and ready to take on a new challenge.

Read Full Post »

My first sit down seminar with Fred Mudhai was rather an interesting one. We mainly discussed the course and the breakdown of it.

It seems I will be doing two assignments; a project essay and a group presentation.

The presentation will be about a country’s media policy and systems, I will cover one and my partner (as yet to be discovered) will study another. Then we shall come together to compare the two countries and put forward a presentation.

I am interested in 3 countries currently, the first being the UK: I have come to realise that although I am coping well and learning as I’m going I still don’t know a hell of a lot about the media policies of Britain. I am slowly getting through McNae’s Essential Law for Journalists (2007) as recommended by Marcos Young and I’m sure I will have a better understanding of common law and practices by the end of the year anyway.

So part of me thinks the US would be very interesting as I could see myself working in the US and I am generally interested in their media policies as some of it seems to be so much more heavily influenced by the government (or at least some of the major corps do), so I would enjoy that one quite a bit.

Another one I would take great interest in is the Czech Republic. I would be keen to study the change in journalistic freedoms this former Soviet occupied state has seen since the collapse of the Berlin Wall and I doubt there are too many people considering covering Central Europe.

A lot of my decision will be based who I am partnered up with. I will consider some more then get back to you. In the meantime I have LOTS of reading to do for this module and I’ll be writing about Global Communication – Theories, Stakeholders and Trends McPhail (2006) shortly. So don’t go anywhere, we’ll be back after this short commercial break.

Read Full Post »