Resources and analysis on the topic of media regulation, particularly for the A2 Media exam, Section B. Major case studies include the film industry, music video and the press, with major players such as Murdoch, OfCom and the government considered. If using materials from this blog, please credit the source - Dave Burrowes, Media Studies @ St George's School
Exam date
Some key posts and resources
- 2019 and earlier IPSO cases
- 2021 overview
- BBFC historic bans, subjective judgement?
- BBFC Human Centipede 2
- BBFC overview essay style writing
- BBFC overview with vids
- BBFC U/PG cases Postman Pat--Paddington--Watership Down
- Daily Mail IPSO google
- EU press flak
- IPSO arbitration fines scheme
- IPSO children rulings
- IPSO PCC arguments FOR
- Murdoch flak/conc of ownership
- MUSIC RACISM drill musicians criminalised
- Press reg history (website)
- Privacy 2018 summary
- Social media alt to IPSO?
- Social media as alt reg/FAANGS power up to early 2019
- StopFundingHate
- Tabloid Corrections
- Telegraph libel payout AFTER IPSO ruling unsatisfactory
- The Rock Daily Star Insta
Monday, 18 September 2017
WEB 2.0 Celebs sponsor posts face ASA and FTC crackdown
IPSO Mail guilty of Clause 1 climate change breach but just hot air?
Finally is the word to springs to my mind, and I see the scientist complainant has had 3 previous complaints rejected as well as parts of this one.
The PCC allowed the Mail to lead the way with often preposterous anti-EU propaganda over decades, a poison drip that certainly influenced the Brexit vote, and continues to impact on the contentious claims that this narrow vote by part of the electorate forms an absolute mandate.
Climate change denial is another field in which the Mail clouds the issue alongside it's fellow right-wing rags; shouldn't it and the likes of The Sun be feeling the heat over incessant clouding or clowning around Clause One?
At least IPSO has issued a partial breach ruling ... but so what? What impact will this really have? Will the paper really be more cautious in its future approach? Does this undermine the impact of its years of denial reportage and editorial?
Press regulator censures Mail on Sunday for global warming claims https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/sep/17/press-regulator-censures-mail-on-sunday-for-global-warming-claims?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Blogger
Sunday, 10 September 2017
PRESS Murdoch making Wall Street Journal Trump mouthpiece
Murdoch's high profile purchase of the august WSJ was controversial enough to provoke a revelatory book warning Americans of what this would mean for their democracy.
The classic Murdoch playbook can be seen here: a fiercely right-wing editor brutally teaching journalists what to self-censor and what tone to take by routinely spiking or editing stories critical of Trump or Murdoch's business empire, or not being critical enough of Trump's political or Murdoch's media rivals.
There are claims that Murdoch and Trump, whose election Fox News played a large role in, speak every day. Murdoch has had British PMs kow-towing to his rabidly right-wing agenda since 1979, and now it seems he may finally have reached the top step in US political influence too.
Ownership of the press is not usually raised whenever the press becomes the story, as it did over phone hacking, but as Curran and Seaton argued in Power Without Responsibility, looking back at the 1800s legal reforms that squashed a thriving radical press and the very explicit statements made in parliamentary debate around seeking to encourage "the right sort of people" (the rich) as press owners, it is a central issue in press regulation and the very, very weak nature of this. Chomsky and Herman also recognised this, listing it as one of the five filters in their propaganda model.
The Wall Street Journal's Trump problem https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/sep/10/the-wall-street-journals-trump-problem?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Blogger