James Murdoch

BBC News
James Murdoch 'knows nothing'
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-15677171
James Murdoch's reputation took a "further battering" as he was questioned by MPs about whether he knew about the phone hacking
If there was evidence that James Murdoch was aware of the phone hacking, it would end his career
Three former News International employees say that he knew about the phone hacking
Later this month, shareholders of BSkyB will vote on whether or not James Murdoch should stay as chairman, but BSkyB don't believe that there will be a rebellion to that extent

The Guardian
James Murdoch claims truth about phone-hacking was hidden from him
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/10/james-murdoch-phone-hacking-myler-crone?CMP=EMCMEDEML665
War of words erupts as two ex-News of the World executives refuse to take the blame
A two and a half hour session saw James Murdoch fighting for his reputation
He didn't rule out the possibility of The Sun closing if more evidence of phone hacking emerged

The Sun
Murdoch: I didn't see hacking email
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/3928507/Murdoch-I-didnt-see-hacking-email.html
James Murdoch insisted "I behaved reasonably, given the information I had"
"It is not something that I would condone, it is not something I had knowledge of, and it is not something I thing that has a place in the way we operate"

Newspapers

Newspapers: In Decline
“It is becoming increasingly difficult for paper-based news forms to compete with the
rise in e-media news services”
“Over the last decade, the UK’s daily newspapers have lost some 2.25 million readers”
“In the last 10 years, advertising revenues have fallen by about 20%”
Circulation has fallen due to new and digital media forms, so the revenue of paper sales has fallen. Less circulation means that advertisers are not willing to pay as much, so advertising revenues have also fallen, meaning that newspapers are struggling to make profit.

Why is the newspaper industry in crisis?
Ignoring signs of change
Dismissing unconventional competitors
Experimenting too narrowly
Giving up on promising experiments too quickly
Embarking on a ‘crash course’
As newspaper institutions did not adapt quickly enough to the rise of new and digital media, they are now in crisis. They were too slow to try new things.

Should news be free?
“Expansion of state-sponsored journalism is a threat to the plurality and independence of
news provision” – James Murdoch
“It is essential for the future of independent digital journalism that a fair price can be charged for news to people who value it” – James Murdoch
News on the web provided by the BBC makes it “incredibly difficult” for private news organisations to ask people to pay for their news.
As the BBC is a public service broadcaster, it can offer news for free as it does not need to make profit. However, other news institutions are profit driven so need to find a way for people to be willing to pay for news.

The democratisation of news?
“The internet has given readers much more power” – Rupert Murdoch
“The world is changing and newspapers have to adapt to that” – Rupert Murdoch
“Most compelling pictures come from eyewitnesses, and not from journalists” – Chris Cramer
“Passive audiences are gone forever. Today, media owners need to embrace the ‘digital conversations’ with their news, activist, audiences” – Chris Cramer
Advances in technology mean that audiences offer news to news institutions for them to be
able to make a story
News institutions
have to recognise the validity of eye-witnesses
The role of a professional journalist has changed as rather than finding and researching news stories, they now just check the content of a citizen journalist

Audience power?
Through social media such as Twitter, audiences now have increasing power.

Citizen Journalism

Ian Tomlinson
When Ian Tomlinson died, it was a video filmed by a member of the public that showed that he was hurt by a police officer. The video is different from professional journalism as it was filmed on a video phone so it is of poor quality. Without citizen journalism, the reason for the heart attack which caused his death would have never been known.

Arab Spring
Social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter helped citizens of Arab countries to organise protests as they could spread information quickly and to large groups of people at one time. Social networking offers freedom of speech, whereas it is less likely for a professional journalist to publicise things that would go against their government, such as the protests. The Arab Spring has meant that many countries that have been under dictatorship have been able to start a revolution as social networking has given them the power to overthrow these dictators.

The Rise and Rise of UGC

1. Citizen journalists are members of the public who create their own news. This could be by posting articles online through UGC such as blogs, but it also involves any footage that has been created. Citizen journalists often film big events and send the footage into news institutions.

2. One of the first examples of citizen journalism was in 1991 when Rodney King was beaten by the police, and a member of the public filmed it. The footage was shown on news channels around the world.

3. News organisations now allow audience participation through voting (phone and online), surveys, questioning people in the street, online forums.

4. The main difference between professionally shot footage and UGC is that professionally shot footage is of a better quality as the professionals were prepared as they were expecting to be filming, but UGC is filmed on the spot and would be of a poorer quality as people are trying to get in on the action and whatever is happening may have been unexpected. Also, professionally shot footage is filmed on expensive camera equipment, where UGC is usually filmed on video phones.

5. A gatekeeper is someone who controls what is and isn’t going to be published depending on the popularity of the story.

6. Gatekeeping roles have changed because it is harder to control the news that people hear about due to citizen journalism. Gatekeepers now have to try to regulate the internet.

7. The primary concern of journalists over UGC is that citizen journalists are taking their jobs so there is no longer as much need for professional journalists. Audiences often trust citizen journalism more than media institutions as citizen journalism has no bias or gatekeeping.

Wikipedia

Wikipedia was launched by Jimmy Wales and Larry Sanger

The owners of Wikipedia don't own any traditional media businesses

I don't think the owners of Wikipedia own any other internet companies

Wikipedia is a non-profit organisation, so they make no revenue

Three key facts about Wikipedia:

• Registered users can write articles
• Over 270 languages
• Articles about recent events appear quickly on Wikipedia, so some people consider it to be like a news resource

Linked articles - Democratisation of knowledge and User-generated content

Democratisation of knowledge:

• Spread of knowledge among everyone, not just the elite
• The printing press and industrial revolution
• 400 million viewers worldwide
• Google Book Search

User-generated content:

• 'Conversational media' encourages people to publish their own content
• Citizen journalism is now a significant part of broadcast news

Quote from Larry Sanger, co-founder of Wikipedia - "Professionals are no longer needed for the bare purpose of mass distribution of information and the shaping of opinion"

Critics have accused the mainstream media of tokenism and stereotyping by creating extreme and exaggerated representations.

To what extent is this true for the group or place you have studied?

When audiences gain certain generalised views about certain groups of people, the media play on these stereotypes to create recognisable and identifiable characters for mainstream audiences. Although the stereotypes can be beneficial in soaps and sitcoms, where the exaggerations of these stereotypes are used for comedic effect, stereotyping also raises issues as it may cultivate audience to develop beliefs about certain groups of people, some of which are negative. Tokenism in the media also sparks debate as although different groups of people want to be represented in the media, they should add to the narrative rather than being included just as token characters. Tokenism and stereotyping have been seen across the media over the years, but some groups of people are now starting to take control over the way that they are represented, while some producers are breaking stereotypes to show alternative representations.

In the 1950’s to 70’s, only 20-35% of all TV characters were women. Gaye Tuchman described this underrepresentation as “the symbolic annihilation of women”. However, most texts had the token female. When they were shown, they were given the stereotypical housewife role and were represented as happy to stay at home cooking and cleaning. This stereotype helped to reinforce the patriarchal ideologies of the time because, as the cultivation theory suggests, the audience would be made to believe that the women represented in the media were examples of the ideal woman that everyone should strive to be like. Not only was the happiness of women exaggerated, but as this was the only representation of women that was ever seen, the exaggerated stereotype seemed normal. As the media was run by men, they created women how they wanted them to be by the way that they represented them.

During the Second World War, women posed a threat to men as they were given the jobs that belonged to men who were fighting in the war. The power and rights that women were now starting to gain threatened patriarchy, so the film noir era saw a backlash to these threats. The femme fatale of film noir represented the stereotypical view at the time that women with too much power are dangerous and shouldn’t be given the power that men should have. An example of this is Double Indemnity, a film that shows a woman using her femininity to manipulate men, which could be seen as a warning to male audiences that women with power are dangerous. Like most film noirs, the film ends with a man murdering the femme fatale, emphasising the stereotypical view that a man is needed to restore harmony. This cultivated audiences to trust the patriarchy of the time, restoring the hegemonic hierarchy.

The feminist era led to media texts representing women in a wider range of roles. Women were liberated and given more authoritative roles, showing the power that women now have. However, post-feminism caused women to revert to previous roles where they were objectified for the voyeuristic pleasure of men, as well as narcissistic pleasures as seeing men in films with beautiful women made male audiences members believe that they too could get these women. Laura Mulvey’s theory of the male gaze believes that women in cinema have the role of pleasing an assumed male audience. However, post-feminism saw not only a rise in the amount of objectification of women in cinema, but across all platforms, especially with the new lads mags. The difference between post-feminism and the previous objectification of women is that the objectification had turned into self-objectification, with women now being happy to adhere to the male gaze. This brought back the ideology that the stereotypical woman is promiscuous and is happy to be, a stereotype that the media still maintains today. Although this seems negative as it is the male owners of the media that create these texts, post-feminists would argue that it empowers women as they have the choice of showing themselves and giving the men what they want.

Another way that women have tried to break their stereotypical subordinate roles is by being androgynous. As Judith Butler suggests, gender is only determined by how people behave, so by taking on stereotypically masculine characteristics, women appear to be more powerful and dominant as they are now the male gender. This is widely seen in the music industry, with artists such as Pink and Lady Gaga seeming more assertive by the way that they act and dress. By getting rid of the characteristics that are associated with the female gender, they also lose the stereotypes.

Soap operas use a lot of stereotyping to make their characters instantly identifiable. Also, every soap uses tokenism to include what they believe is all types of people in their soap. Eastenders included a character who was the token disabled character. However, he did not have a stereotypical role as rather than being a character for the audience to sympathise with, he was a Proppian villain, which highlighted issues about people with disabilities being represented as people to pity. There is also the token gay character in Eastenders but, like the disabled character, the two gay characters are not stereotypical. One of them is a strong fitness instructor, which does not follow the stereotype of gay men being androgynous, and the other is a Muslim, which raises debates about how homosexuality is viewed by different groups of people. While Eastenders uses many stereotypical roles, such as young people and chavs, they also include other characters who lead audiences to rethink stereotypical roles.

Young people are often demonised in the contemporary media landscape. This was recently seen during the London riots, when the news represented young people as violent and with no morals. As the news is mainly owned by the hegemonic elite, white, middle aged men, a Marxist would argue that young people were all stereotyped as destructive when it was only a small group of people to keep themselves in power. This same stereotype of young people being antisocial is seen in The World’s Strictest Parents as the young people are so bad that even their parents cannot cope with them anymore. When they are sent to other parents, the children of these parents have an alternative representation of young people as they are always respectful and well behaved. This influences the British youths to change when they get back home. This offers different receptions for the audience as while the dominant reading of the text is that young people are disruptive and need strict parenting to change, an oppositional reading is that it is not the young people that the fault lies with, but the way that they are brought up. This is because of the young people from other countries who do not have the stereotypical characteristics of young people in Britain.

Social Media and the London Riots

David Cameron considers banning suspected rioters from social media

"Social networking sites such as Twitter, Facebook and BlackBerry Messenger are thought to have played a role in organising riots across the UK"

"The government is looking at banning people from using social networking sites such as Twitter and Facebook if they are thought to be plotting criminal activity"

"'Everyone watching these horrific actions will be struck by how they were organised via social media. Free flow of information can be used for good. But it can also be used for ill,' said Cameron"

"A move to disconnect potential rioters would mark a huge shift in Britain's internet policy, with free speech advocates likely to accuse the government of ushering in a new wave of online censorship"

London riots: hundreds answer appeal to clean up streets

"Facebook and Twitter mobilises hunderds of people to clear debris from streets on London's worst-hit communities"

"Many of those at Clapham Junction had been directed to the area from other parts of London by the online clean-up campaign, tagged on Twitter as #riotcleanup"

"Many saw the clean-up as a fitting riposte to the vilification of social media, which played a key role in the organisation of the riots"

"By 10am the tag was the top trending topic in the UK and the second worldwide"

Task 5

The Simpsons

Dominant: A dominant reading of The Simpsons is that it is a light-hearted programme that uses stereotypical families and situations for comedy.

Negotiated: A negotiated reading of The Simpsons is that it plays on stereotypes for comedy, which some people may find offensive, but the offence is not intended and it is merely for satire.

Oppositional: An oppositional reading of The Simpsons is that it is a racist and sexist programme that is ruining society as the representation of a typical nuclear family is very negative and our families will end up like that if people keep watching this rubbish.

My view is sort of negotiated, but oppositional to an extent.

Task 3

Media representations rarely challenge the dominant values of society, nor do they give a voice to those with little power. To what extent is this true for the group or place you have studied? Why?

The media industry is dominated by white, middle class males. Media representations often favour this group of people and marginalise others. This is seen with the representations of both women and the working class. Both of these groups of people are represented how the dominant groups in society would view them, which shows the hegemonic class structures of our society.

Before the Second World War, women were under represented in the media. When they were shown, they were represented in the roles that men thought that they should have, mainly as housewives. However, during the war, after women started to gain more power, posing a threat to men, they were represented as femme fatales, dangerous and evil women. This restored hegemony as people gained a fear of women and men were needed to restore natural order.


After the feminist movement, women had more equality as they were represented more. However, the audience were given the male gaze as women were objectified, so although they are given a voice, it is only allowed when they are providing pleasure for males. A post-feminist view is that women have the right to be objectified if they agree with it as they still feel a sense of power by being able to decide whether or not to give men what they want. Therefore, although some would think that women are not given a voice, post-feminists would argue that they are given a voice and they have power as well.


Another group of people who are rarely given a voice are the working class. In the news, the working class are represented as anti social and always getting into trouble. However, after the rise of reality TV, the working class now have more opportunity to represent themselves, and since the increase in the popularity of reality shows, the representations of the working class have changed. Programmes like Big Brother give the working class opportunity to represent themselves, therefore giving them a voice. It is clear that the working class are accepted as they always outlast the higher classes on Big Brother, and every successful contestant is from a working class background. This challenges hegemonic values as the elite no longer have as much power because now that the lower classes have been given a voice, they are more accepted by society.

Task 2

"Media institutions are right to feel threatened by new and digital media." Consider this statement and show how media institutions are reacting to technological developments.

Changing technologies and new and digital media have changed the way that audiences consume media products. User generated content has meant that audiences are no longer just consumers of the media, but producers too. Also, new and digital media has led to more plurality as there are so many more media products available. Although this has created many benefits for audiences, it could be a threat to producers and media institutions as there is less need for them. This is seen in many areas of the media, particularly with the news and TV broadcasting.

The newspaper industry has been in decline since new and digital media gave audiences new ways to consume the news. Online news means that audiences can now get news for free. Also, they can get it when they want, making it more accessible and convenient for audiences. This means that there is less need for audiences to buy newspapers as they can get the same content for free. Also, smart phones mean that audiences can get the news delivered directly to their phones while they are out.

To deal with the threats posed by news and digital media, institutions have had to change their media products. The Evening Standard, once a popular newspaper, is now given away for free as audiences stopped paying for it. Also, some newspaper websites have decided to introduce paywalls to stop audiences from being able to access the news for free. Rupert Murdoch released a new newspaper, The Daily, that is only available on the iPad, making the news less accessible, therefore increasing competition between producers again.

TV broadcasting has also been affected by new and digital media. Online catch up services, such as BBC iPlayer and 4oD mean that audiences can watch TV in their own time rather than at the scheduled time. Time shifting channels such as Channel 4+1 also gives audiences more plurality as they have a bigger choice of when to watch. The declining importance of scheduling is a threat to institutions as it makes it more difficult to target particular audiences. Also, online TV is always accessible so there is no regulation like there is with watershed.

TV broadcasting institutions have had to change so that new and digital media does not threaten them. Sky 3D and Sky HD give audiences a more cinematic experience that is not available online. Also, audiences can now record TV with technologies such as Sky+ so they can do their own scheduling but still watch TV rather than online TV.

Task 1

Compare and contrast the representation of teenagers in the two texts

In the trailer for Bully, teenagers are represented negatively. The protagonist is immediately shown to not be a nice person as he creates conflict with people. He is seen fighting people and intimidating them, which is a common representation of teenage boys. His appearance also signifies that he will be represented negatively as he has a rough appearance because of the way that he wears his clothes, as well as his lack of hair which gives him a thug-like appearance.

The opening for Skins also shows a negative representation of teenagers, however, it is a different representation. The characters of Skins are represented as being hedonistic and not caring about responsibilities. This is shown through the frequent amount of smoking and sex that is seen through the opening, which mirrors the current view of teenagers just caring about drugs, sex and rebellion.

Although both texts represent teenagers negatively, these representations are different. While Bully represents teenagers as disruptive and threatening, Skins represents them as hedonistic and irresponsible, but harmless. However, both of these different representations are dominant as these are the most common representations of teenagers.

Consider the view that the current representation of teenagers is simply another 'moral panic'

To what extent has new and digital media given younger audience the opportunities to shape their own media representations?

New and digital media has given people the chance to represent themselves as user generated content means that they can create their own media. Teenagers are frequent users of new and digital media so they have a lot of opportunity to shape their own representations. Texts such as YouTube, where users can post their own videos, give teenagers the chance to show people what they are like and be seen by a lot of people. Also, social networking websites such as Facebook give people the opportunity of social interaction with younger people, meaning that they can get to know younger people, so teenagers have the opportunity to shape their own representations.

"Media representations favour those with power at the expense of those without." To what extent do you think this statement is true?

Over time, media representations change, and it could be argued that these representations change with the balance of power in both society and the media industry. The media industry is dominated by white males, which is reflected through media products. As Stuart Hall suggests, the white race is favoured over any other, and whenever there is a token black man is a film he will mostly be represented as either the villain or the clown. This idea of hegemony, the power of the elite, is also shown through the representation of women. Before the feminist movement, women were shown in the stereotypical roles of housewives and, later, the femme fatale of the film noir era. This is because of the power of the patriarchal society that some consider we are still living in today. There have been many changing representations of women, and these changes are because of the changes in power.

Before the Second World War, women were subordinated into roles that showed them in what men considered their rightful place as the caring housewife. During the war, women had to take men's jobs while they were out fighting and men felt threatened by the power that women now felt. To sustain patriarchal hierarchy, the femme fatale character was created. This represented women negatively as the femme fatale is a powerful and dominant seductress who proves to pose a danger to men, and peace and happiness comes only with her downfall. A well-known example of this is Phyllis, the femme fatale of Double Indemnity. Phyllis is represented as the villain who lures Walter into crime. At the end of the film, the only resolution is to murder Phyllis, and the man has to be the one that restores the peace. This shows that the representations of women in the media favour hegemonic and patriarchal values over the subordinated women.

After the feminist movement, representations of women changed. As women gained more power, there are now less negative representations of women, although they do still exist. In Ashes to Ashes, the woman is still subordinated and is faced with misogyny from Gene Hunt. However, it could be said that the representations of gender roles in Ashes to Ashes satirise patriarchy to make audiences question it. This is also shown in Doghouse, where the misogyny from male characters leads to their downfall. While some argue that women are still being subordinated and objectified in the media, a stronger interpretation is that women decide to be sexualised by self-objectifying. This is seen in lads mags, as the women decide to pose in these pictures for the pleasure of men. They play up to the male gaze as not only do men gain pleasure from being voyeuristic, but the women get pleasure from knowing that they are being watched. It can be said that women gain a sense of power by luring men in and deciding what they get to see. Therefore, these representations of women do not favour anyone as there are benefits for both the active females and the passive males.

Although media representations of the working class in reality TV seem to favour those in power, the audience generally enjoy watching them. The majority of reality TV contestants are working class and through the construction of reality TV, it seems that producers try to make the contestants look common and try to represent a lot of their negative aspects as conflict is popular on reality TV. However, the audience seem to like the characters and working class contestants are more likely to win than someone from a higher socio-economic background. Although the way that the working class are represented seems to favour those with power, the way that audience members views them is against this.

It has been said that media representations often reflect the social and political concerns of the age in which they are created. Discuss.

Over the years, media representations have been constructed in order to reflect the zeitgeist of different years. The media often play on stereotypes to make representations easily identifiable to audiences. However, these representations change over time as the way that groups of people are viewed changed and the media has to keep up with this. Also, issues and debates to do with the ways that groups of people are perceived changes the way that they are represented in the media to avoid controversy.

In the film noir era, women were mainly represented as femme fatales. This was because of the threat to patriarchy that they posed after the Second World War as they had more power after doing jobs for men. As the media is a male dominated industry, the representation of women changed from showing them as housewives to showing them as evil seductresses to be aware of. The earlier representation of them as housewives showed women the role that men decided that they should be in, and the later representation of the femme fatale showed men the dangers of women with power. Femme fatales were shown to use their sexuality to lure men. As Goffman states, "Men are shown in positions of intelligence. Women are physically portrayed in sexual or reclining poses with blank or inviting expressions", and this was shown in the film noir era, and is still being shown now.

After the feminist movement came post-feminism. Since the 1990s, women have self-objectifying themselves and using their sexuality. This is shown through lads mags, as although it can be said that women are being subordinated, they are still in power as they are the ones who decide what the men can see in photographs.

Another representation that has changed over time is the representation of the working class. The working class used to be represented in films and the news as a separate group of people who the hegemonic society look down on. However, after the rise of reality TV in the 2000s, the working class are given more of a chance to represent themselves positively. The majority of Big Brother contestants are working class, and it is these people who the public vote for as their winners. When there are higher class people in Big Brother, they are less admired by the public and are evicted early. This challenges hegemonic values as the working class are shown to be more likable than the higher classes.

Reality TV has also shown a change in the representation of different races. In the famous Big Brother race row, the public sympathised with Shilpa Shetty, the Asian, and Jade Goody, the white character, was represented as the villain. This is partly due to mediation, as Shilpa Shetty was shown as a victim. This could be because in current society, race is an issue so representing the Asian as the villain would have been risky as it could have been controversial.

Media representations do reflect the age that they are created. The representations of both women and the working class have changed over time, and reflect the views of society at the time.

Did the washing machine change the world more than the internet?

I think that the washing machine has changed the world more than the internet. The internet provides audiences with information and entertainment, and some would say that the powers of the internet are endless. However, the internet did not bring anything new, but just changed the way in which we consumed things, not always for the better. We now live an immediate society where people expect things straight away and in the most convenient way, which could be breaking our society down. People have less time to talk to each other as social networking means that they can talk online while doing other things. Also, people have less time to spend on more intellectual things, such as reading, as so much time is spent on the internet. The washing machine is more beneficial to us as it gives us more time to spend with people and to do more worthwhile things because people do not have to wash by hand. It gave women liberation as rather than washing clothes, they had the opportunity to be independent. Also, while the internet is a want, the washing machine is a necessity.

The net isn't as important as we think

Ha-Joon Chang: The net isn't as important as we think

The economist and author says the washing machine changed the world more than the internet, a tool we overestimate while ignoring its downsides

Ha-Joon Chang, born in South Korea in 1963, is an economist based at Cambridge University specialising in development. Known for his heterodox views, he is the author of several books, including Kicking Away the Ladder (2002) and Bad Samaritans: The Myth of Free Trade and the Secret History of Capitalism (2008). In his new book, 23 Things They Don't Tell You About Capitalism (Allen Lane, Chang debunks many cherished myths about the free market. In one chapter, he says: "The washing machine changed the world more than the internet."Top of Form

Is it really true that the washing machine has changed the world more than the internet?

When we assess the impact of technological changes, we tend to downplay things that happened a while ago. Of course, the internet is great – I can now google and find the exact location of this restaurant on the edge of Liverpool or whatever. But when you look at the impact of this on the economy, it's mainly in the area of leisure.

The internet may have significantly changed the working patterns of people like you and me, but we are in a tiny minority. For most people, its effect is more about keeping in touch with friends and looking up things here and there. Economists have found very little evidence that since the internet revolution productivity has grown.

And the washing machine was more transformative?

By liberating women from household work and helping to abolish professions such as domestic service, the washing machine and other household goods completely revolutionised the structure of society. As women have become active in the labour market they have acquired a different status at home – they can credibly threaten their partners that if they don't treat them well they will leave them and make an independent living. And this had huge economic consequences. Rather than spend their time washing clothes, women could go out and do more productive things. Basically, it has doubled the workforce.

The washing machine is just one element here. Other factors have contributed to the liberation of women – feminism, the pill and so on.

Yes, but feminism couldn't have been implemented unless there was this technological basis for a society where women went out and worked. Of course it's not just the washing machine, it's piped water, electricity, irons and so on.

Do we tend to overestimate the importance of communications revolutions?

Not always. The invention of the printing press was one of the most important events in human history. But we overestimate the internet and ignore its downsides. There's now so much information out there that you don't actually have time to digest it.

In another chapter of the book, I talk about the American economist Herbert Simon, who argued that our problem now is that we have limited decision-making capability rather than too little information. If you try to find something on the internet, it's a deluge. And in terms of productivity, the internet has its drawbacks – for example, it makes it a lot easier to bunk off work.

But what about the sheer speed at which it allows us to do things?

That is exaggerated too. Before the invention of the telegraph in the late 19th century, it took two to three weeks to carry a message across the Atlantic. The telegraph reduced it to 20 or 30 minutes – an increase of 2,000-3,000 times. The internet has reduced the time of sending, say, three or four pages of text from the 30 seconds you needed with a fax machine down to maybe two seconds – a reduction by a factor of 15. Unless I'm trading commodity futures, I can't think of anything where it's really so important that we send it in two seconds rather than a few minutes.

Does it matter that we overestimate the internet's importance?

On one level, no. If I think the Sun goes round the Earth, it's not going to affect how I do my grocery shopping or teach economics. But where it does matter is that a lot of people have come to accept a policy action or business decision on the grounds that this is something driven by technological changes rather than by active human decisions. So anyone who is against total globalisation is a modern luddite.

This idea that the internet is driving globalisation has enabled business leaders and politicians to get away with decisions made for their own self-interest, because people have been too ready to accept that things have to be like this.

Do we fundamentally misunderstand the nature of capitalism, as the title of your book implies?

Let me start by saying that I am an advocate of capitalism. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, I think it's the worst economic system except for all the others. So I'm not an anti-captialist, or anarchist. I want capitalism to work. But the version of capitalism that we have practised in the past two or three decades is a very extreme free-market version which, contrary to the claims of many economists, is not the only or best way to run things. There are many different ways and in the book I show that countries that have run capitalism differently – even if they practise free-market capitalism today – have done much better.

Net Neutrality

What is net neutrality?

Net neutrality is when internet service providers don't restrict particular websites and how fast users can connect to them.

Is the internet neutral?

The internet is not neutral but I think it's as neutral as it will ever be.

Should it be?

No. If internet service providers want to use different speeds, they can. If users don't like it, there are other internet service providers.

Net Neutrality - The New York Times

Net Neutrality, Back in Court

It was predictable that a telephone or cable company would challenge the rules proposed last December by the Federal Communications Commission to guarantee that the Internet remains an open network.

Still, the lawsuits filed by Verizon and MetroPCS earlier this year against the F.C.C.’s net neutrality rules are disappointing. The suits fall into a swirl of antiregulatory fervor among Republicans on Capitol Hill. The continuing resolution passed by the House last week forbids the F.C.C. from using any money to put the new rules into effect.

That bill, and the lawsuits, risk stripping away the F.C.C.’s light-touch attempt to ensure that the Internet remains open — an approach carefully crafted in months of negotiations with Verizon and other companies.

The suits could potentially free Internet service providers from regulation — allowing them to treat their own content better than that of rivals, and block content that they didn’t like or competed with. Verizon and AT&T have about 60 percent of wireless subscribers. And 80 percent of Americans live in areas with only two wireline broadband providers. In a market with such slender competition, consumers are likely to lose out.

Verizon’s argument is simple: it doesn’t want the F.C.C. to write rules for the Internet. This is especially true when it comes to wireless, which it views as virgin territory. The question is, should Verizon be allowed to, say, block Web sites that compete with its own services and discriminate at will to pursue its business interests? To us, that should be an area of federal intervention.

Both lawsuits take advantage of a weakness in the F.C.C.’s approach: in proposing new rules for the Internet, it decided to stick to the Bush administration’s definition of the Internet as an “information service” rather than reclassify it as a telecom service. The F.C.C. has limited regulatory power over information services, and much more over telecommunications.

In April 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the F.C.C.’s authority over information services was so limited that past efforts to ensure network neutrality exceeded its authority. While the commission believes its new rules will survive the court challenge, we fear that its strategy is legally vulnerable. Verizon and MetroPCS are bringing their cases in the D.C. Circuit.

The choice for American consumers is between the open broadband they have come to expect — in which they can view any content from sources big and small — and a walled garden somewhat like cable TV, where providers can decide what we can see, and at what price.

Net Neutrality - BBC News

Minister Ed Vaizey backs 'two-speed' internet

Culture minister Ed Vaizey has backed a “two-speed” internet, letting service providers charge content makers and customers for “fast lane” access.

It paves the way for an end to "net neutrality" - with heavy bandwidth users like Google and the BBC likely to face a bill for the pipes they use.

Mr Vaizey said ISPs must be free to experiment with new charges to help pay for the expansion in internet services.

But critics warn the move could harm free speech and stifle innovation.

'Fast lane'

Internet Service Providers (ISPs) are supposed to treat all web traffic equally - serving only as a one-size-fits-all pipe for whatever data is passing from content providers to end users.

But a debate has been raging around the world over how much they should be allowed to control the size of their pipes, and thus the internet speed that users get from the site.

In the US, President Barack Obama has backed net neutrality - treating all traffic equally - and regulators have threatened possible legal action against ISPs that block or restrict access to sites.

But some traffic management, where traffic from one source is favoured over another, is likely to be allowed, with a ruling due next year, Mr Vaizey suggests.

The EU has also backed traffic management but with greater transparency to ensure the internet remains "open" - something that will soon be enshrined in UK law.

Mr Vaizey argues that most ISPs already carried out traffic management "to ensure the smooth running of their networks" without any impact on competition or consumer rights.

In his speech, he argues that the continued quality of internet services in the UK is under threat due to the rapid expansion of mobile and wireless networks and the "massive investment" it needed.

As a result, ISPs had to be free to experiment with new ways of raising revenue - provided customers were clear about what they were buying.

He says: "We have got to continue to encourage the market to innovate and experiment with different business models and ways of providing consumers with what they want.

"This could include the evolution of a two-sided market where consumers and content providers could choose to pay for differing levels of quality of service."

He also suggests that content makers could be charged for the first time for the use of the ISP's networks - provided they too were clear about what they were getting.

"Content and application providers should be able to know exactly what level of service they are getting especially if they are paying for it," he says.

'Appalling'

He added that the government did not want to introduce new laws on top of those already being adopted from the EU to guarantee an "open" internet, arguing that light touch regulation was better.

He also argued that, that unlike in the US where some areas only had the choice of one service provider, there was enough rivalry between providers to ensure consumers' rights were protected.

"The essential competition we enjoy in Europe and especially in the UK, will be an essential safeguard against unfair discrimination," he argues.

He said ISPs must also guarantee that net users can continue to access any legal website or content.

"In order for the internet to continue as the open, innovative force for good that it has been over the past 20 years it is essential that all elements continue to prosper.

"This means ensuring that content providers and applications have open access to consumers and vice versa.

"But it also means allowing ISPs and networks to innovate and experiment with new ways of delivering what consumers want so we can ensure continued investment in the infrastructure that delivers the content and applications we all use."

But Jim Killock, of net freedom campaigners the Open Rights Group, said the proposals could have "appalling" consequences for free speech and commercial innovation.

"Ed Vaizey is wrong to assume that there is no problem if BT or Virgin restrict people's internet access for their commercial advantage. Removing 'net neutrality' will reduce innovation and reduce people's ability to exercise their freedom of speech.

"This is why ORG will campaign against any market abuse, should Ed Vaizey allow it to happen."

'Peak times'

But the Internet Service Providers Association (ISPA) welcomed what it called Mr Vaizey's "lightly-regulated, market-based approach" towards traffic management, adding that ISPs should be "open and transparent" to boost confidence in the industry.

An ISPA spokesman said: "This approach will reassure those who are investing in networks and coming up with new, innovative online business models.

"A number of ISPA members already provide consumers with clear information on traffic management practices and we expect to see this extended.

"ISPs use traffic management techniques so that they are able to effectively and efficiently run and manage their networks for the benefits of all users.

"This enables ISPs to prioritise time-sensitive applications, such as VoIP and online gaming, at peak times."

Net Neutrality - The Guardian

Berners-Lee warns ISPs on net neutrality

Inventor of world wide web says plans for 'two-speed' internet go against its principles

The inventor of the world wide web, Sir Tim Berners-Lee, has warned internet service providers (ISPs) that plans for a "two-speed" internet go against the principles that have let the net grow so rapidly in the past two decades.

"Best practices should also include the neutrality of the net," Berners-Lee told a round table in Westminster on Wednesday morning, convened by the communications minister Ed Vaizey. Content companies, represented by Facebook, Skype, the BBC and Yahoo, squared up to ISPs, with input from consumer representatives including the Open Rights Group, the Consumers' Association and the communications regulator Ofcom.

Jim Killock of the Open Rights Group, who was representing consumer interests at the meeting, said afterwards that he was concerned about the direction the debate was going: "The potential for something going terribly wrong is absolutely there. The regulator and government do not wish to intervene, for good reason; but industry is not putting forward anything that looks like meaningful self-regulation."

ISPs have for years sought to charge the BBC or customers, or both, for the huge amounts of data transferred over their networks by applications such as the iPlayer, whose popularity has exploded in the past few years. ISPs have to pay for carriage of data from BT's core network to customers, but offer unmetered services on broadband – meaning that when people's demand for data grows, ISPs can be out of pocket.

But the BBC and other content providers such as YouTube have resisted calls that they should pay, on the basis that they are providing a service that allows the ISPs to find customers. In response, ISPs both in the US and Europe have mooted the idea of "two-tier" connections where some services are slower than others. Skype complained at the meeting that its service is effectively blocked on all of the mobile services in the UK except 3, meaning that carriers are violating the principle of net neutrality because they fear it will affect their call revenues.

Berners-Lee told the meeting that "every customer should be able to access every service, and every service should be able to access every customer ... The web has grown so fast precisely because we have had two independent markets, one for connectivity, and the other for content and applications."

Vaizey said the meeting had been "useful and productive" and that "it was important to discuss how to ensure the internet remains an open, innovative and competitive place."

"Net neutrality" – in which services are treated exactly equally as they pass over the net, no matter what their source or destination – has become an increasingly vexed topic as demands on ISPs and mobile carriers have begun to outstrip capacity.

ISPs have thus suggested that they should be allowed to manipulate the transfer of data, but that they would be transparent about how and what they were doing.

On Monday the Broadband Stakeholder Group launched a new traffic management transparency code, which has since been signed by the largest fixed-line and mobile carriers, including BSkyB, BT, Everything Everywhere (formerly Orange and T-Mobile), TalkTalk, 3, Virgin Media and Vodafone. Together they represent more than 90% of all fixed-line broadband and mobile customers in the UK.

It pledges that "information will be provided in a common format to explain what traffic management techniques are used, when and with what impact for each broadband service currently marketed by the code's signatories."

But Rob Reid, senior policy adviser at the Consumers' Association, who was among the attendees at the meeting, said that there was concern that transparency was only one half of the required commitment – because users might be tied into contracts lasting 18 months or more, meaning that if they disliked a change to the traffic management policy it would be expensive to switch to a different provider who offered one they preferred.

Antony Walker, the chief executive of the Broadband Stakeholder Group, told the Guardian: "The issue of [customer] switching is critical. It's the other side of the coin to transparency. Ofcom is working on guidance on this and it is an issue that was highlighted. Everybody agrees that it is important."

Adding faster systems would only work as a short-term measure to relieve congestion on networks, said Walker: "it's like adding more lanes to the M25 – it just attracts more cars. Having faster networks will mean that people will want more services using more data."

But Killock said that not enough was being done yet: "In contrast with the US, where rules are being put in place through the Federal Communications Commission, or Norway where ISPs have agreed a meaningful code, our ISPs are not offering us what we and the UK economy needs. If that continues to be the case, then Ed Vaizey will find himself with the task of breaking the log jam."

"Digital media have, in many ways, changed how we consume media products." Who do you think benefits most - audiences or producers?

Throughout the years, technology has expanded to the point where audiences no longer consume media texts in the same way. New and digital media have made it easier for audiences to consume certain products. Convergence and other technological advances have increased accessibility and made consuming the media more convenient for audiences. As well as audiences, producers have also been affected by new and digital media. Web 2.0 means that audiences can now be producers too, and ever changing media means that producers have to adapt to compete with other companies. The impact of new and digital media is evident in both the news and TV broadcasting as both are now consumed differently to before the rise of digital media.

New and digital media has considerably changed the way that we consume the news. Online news means that the news is more accessible as audiences can read about it whenever they want. Not only is this convenient for audiences as they can decide when and how to consume the news, but it is also free, so new and digital media benefits audiences as the news is more accessible. Rupert Murdoch has recently released a new newspaper that is only available on an iPad, called The Daily. Also, audiences are able to read the news on a smart phone, which adds to the convenience as they can carry the news around with them. Social networking has also changed the way that audiences consume the news as people now rely on finding out about the news through social networking websites such as Facebook. The impact of new and digital media on the news benefits audiences as it makes accessing the news more convenient for them. However, it can be seen as a moral panic that people rely on technology for anything, even receiving the news.

New and digital media has also had an impact of the producers of the news. Free online news, as well as the competition created by the plurality of more news sources, has led to a decline in newspapers, so producers have had to think of new ways to gain audiences. Newspapers such as The Times have tried to make newspapers more convenient for audience by publishing in tabloid format so they are easier to read. Some newspapers also have a lot of content, as The Sunday Times includes many newspapers and magazines in one. Some news websites have had to introduce paywalls as a way of charging for news now that less people are prepared to pay for newspapers. However, citizen journalists are competition for online news as the user-generated content is more reliable as they will publish news that big companies may not want to publish, such as controversial news stories. Therefore, new and digital media has had a mainly negative impact of the producers of the news. However, producers of other media, such as smart phones, have benefited as they now provide audiences with free news, making their services more sought after.

TV broadcasting has also been affected by new and digital media. New technology, such as 3D TV and HD TV, has made TV viewing a more cinematic experience for audiences as the content is now of a higher quality. TV broadcasting now also offers more plurality as audiences don't have to pay as much attention to scheduling. Catch-up services, such as BBC iPlayer, ITV Player, 4oD and Demand 5 allow audiences to watch TV in their own time, as well as timeshifting, such as Channel 4+1. Also, with technology such as Sky +, audiences can record TV, so scheduling is no longer as important. The amount of channels that digital TV offers is also pluralistic as there are more channels to choose rather than just five terrestrial channels. Like the news, new and digital media has made TV broadcasting more convenient for audiences today.

Producers of TV broadcasting have to adapt to keep up with the changing media landscape. To compete with other companies, such as News Corp, most digital TV companies now offer audiences the opportunity to record TV. However, new and digital media has had a negative impact on producers as they can no longer target the right audiences through scheduling as less people watch TV at the scheduled time. Also, online TV cannot be regulated, so audiences may be watching content that is not suitable for them as there is no watershed and post-watershed.

Overall, new and digital media has had a large impact on the way that media products are consumed. Society has become more immediate, and this is reflected in both the news and TV broadcasting. Both are now more convenient for audiences as audiences can decide when, where and how to consume them. The plurality has given audiences more power, meaning that new and digital media has had a positive impact on audiences in relation to the news and TV broadcasting. However, producers of these products have been disadvantaged as they can no longer target the right audience. With TV broadcasting, scheduling is no longer important to audience as new technology allows them to choose their own viewing times, so producers cannot target the right audiences. Also, advertisers can no longer make sure that the right people are watching their adverts as audience watch at different times. Producers of the news are also at a disadvantage as free news means that audiences are less likely to pay as much for newspapers. Also, citizen journalists can be considered to be more reliable than big institutions, so journalists have less of a job.

Are We Obsessed with Facebook?

500 000 000 active Facebook users - 1/13 people on earth
84% of 18-34 year olds check Facebook when they wake up
35+ represents more that 30% of Facebook users
71.2% of USA web users are on Faebook
57% of people talk more online than in person
48% of young Americans find out about news through Facebook

The world is OBSESSED with Facebook!

The Mutualisation of News

"Gone are the days of 'us and them' journalism. The web has led to a news community where ideas and news are shared rather than delivered." The public are just as important as journalists in making the news.

"We controlled the delivery of news and comment to our readers and the only involvement they had was through the carefully controlled letters page." News was controlled before. The public weren't getting the full news story, but only what it was decided that we should be told.

"The development of the internet, and with it the creation of 'citizen journalists', has revolutionised the delivery of information." Citizen journalists, members of the public who create their own news, have changed the way in which we now receive our news.

"We can use the community of our readers in ways we would not have been able to in the past." Readers are more important now than they have ever been before.

"It cannot be true that there are only a handful of people worth listening to in the world. Comment is Free is infinitely richer and more diverse and more plural." Everyone is given a voice, rather than just journalists, as everyone's news is just as important.

"Where members feel involved and where there is a shared interest." Involving readers more. Rather than just reading the news, we are active participants in making it.

"New applications such as Twitter make it increasingly possible for individual journalists to publish outside the constraints of our newspaper and website and develop direct relationships with communities of readers." No restrictions with citizen journalism. Citizen journalists can publish anything they want.

"A blurring of the line between journalism and readers." Readers can now be journalists too.

"Our newspapers have a tight control on information as no story is published until it has gone through several quality checks. But in the world of Twitter, for example, journalists are now publishing information without any monitoring." News is not controlled like it used to be.

"If at some point the technology becomes too large in scale, that is the time to build guidelines. For example, we now have guidelines for Twitter." Danger of new and digital media giving people too much power.

The Impact of New and Digital Media on TV Broadcasting

Has new and digital media had an impact upon ownership and control of the media institutions owned in your case study area? Explain in detail any impact and what exactly has changed.
The BBC is a public service broadcaster that is paid for through licence fees. Because of the plurality that new and digital media offers through a wider range of channels to watch, less people are watching the BBC, which has raised debates about the licence fee as people are paying both the licence fee and their digital TV fee. The BBC now has to compete with digital TV so that viewers feel like they are getting what they paid for. The BBC has done this by releasing its own digital channels, such as BBC 3. This has changed the ownership of media institutions as the BBC has had to branch into digital TV in order to compete with other institutions.
Sky is a part of News Corp, which is one of the biggest media conglomerates. Recently, Sky has released Sky HD and Sky 3D, showing that Sky is developing faster than other TV broadcasting institutions. Digital TV should offer plurality because of the wide choice of channels available. As most people who own digital TV own Sky, a marxist view would be that digital TV is not as pluralistic as it would seem because the channels that are broadcasted are chosen by the institutions.

What impact has there been on the way in which the audience now consume the media products involved in your case study? How does it differ from what went before?
Audiences have a greater choice of what to watch because there are so many more channels available. After the digital switchover, all audiences will have many channels rather than just five.
Online viewing makes watching TV more convenient for audiences as they can watch things in their own time. Also, institutions such as Sky allow viewers to record TV, meaning that audiences have time for other things. Online viewing and recorded TV has led to TV scheduling becoming less important. Also, 3D TV and HD TV make watching TV more of a cinematic experience, so it is more enjoyable.

What impact has there been on how the media institution now has to produce the texts and the way in which the texts are distributed and exhibited?
Online viewing, catch-up services (such as +1) and recorded TV means that less people watch TV at the scheduled time. Because audiences now choose their own scheduled time, TV ratings could decrease. Do the institutions count viewers who do not watch at the scheduled time?
The internet cannot be censored and regulated. Post-watershed shows are not restricted online so new and digital media has meant that texts can now be viewed by anyone.

Is the size of the audience any different now than before the impact of new and digital media (or has the pattern of usage changed)?
Less audiences watch terrestrial TV because of the range of available channels.
People do not watch TV at the scheduled time as they can either record or watch online.
Less audiences watch terrestrial TV because the range of available channels offers plurality.

Who are the primary target audience now and how has this changed?
?

How have the audience responded to the changes? Is there more consumer choice? Is there evidence of a more pluralistic model? What evidence do you have to support this?
Digital TV offers pluralism as there are so many more channels to choose from and audience can pause, rewind and record TV, leaving scheduling up to them. Online viewing is also pluralistic as audiences decide when and how to watch TV.
However, the digital switchover is forcing audiences to buy digital TV. This could affect society as more channels means more time is spent on TV, so people have less time for other things.

What concerns/considerations are there for the media institutions involved in your case study as a result of the impact of new and digital media?
Is there any need for people to do scheduling?
BBC has to compete with digital channels to keep viewers as the pluralism of digital TV means the BBC have less audiences.

What are the political and social implications of the new technologies and the methods of their consumption?
Pluralism is being compromised by the amount of control that certain institutions have over us. News Corp already have a large amount of power, and the increasing amount of people with Sky is giving them even more power and control. The BBC has decreasing power as more and more channels means less people watch the BBC.
With the large amount of time spent watching TV, less people do other things. Is TV breaking down communication in society, and dumbing us down?

Consider the effects so far, and possible effects in the future, on media institutions involved in TV broadcasting.
News Corp will rule us all.
The TV licence may disappear as the BBC can't compete with the amount of other channels available.
Most of our TV viewing will be done through eMedia.

What issues may there be regarding media effects and/or regulation and censorship as a result of changes due to new and digital media?
eMedia can't be regulated. A lot of TV viewing is now done on the eMedia platform, but as this can't be regulated, there are issues about the content that we are being exposed to. There is no watershed, meaning that anyone can watch content that is not suitable for younger audiences. All we have to do is press a button that says that we are old enough.

Are there any cross-cultural factors and/or effects of globalisation involved in the impact of new technology on your case study?
The internet has made the TV of one country available around the world. Any audiences may now be able to watch our TV, however, some texts, such as BBC iPlayer, only allow viewing in certain countries. Content from BBC iPlayer can't be watched in Egypt.