James Murdoch reveals Fox planning new bid for full control of Sky

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/21/james-murdoch-reveals-fox-planning-new-bid-for-full-control-of-sky



James Murdoch is not being happy as he is the chief executive 21st Century FOX as to not having full control on SKY. He believes that all the SKY from different countries in Europe should be one big group and should be controlled by one person. This was because he thought it was not 'optimal' meaning that they would not be a smart move to do if they are separate. Murdoch  tried to seek control then and the rumours are now that FOX might sell its stake in SKY, as it did in relinquishing individual stake in SKY italia and SKY Deutischland. Fox was later waqs forced to give up a £8bn bid for control of SKY in 2011.

1. Rupert Murdoch was going to make a bid to take over Time Warner which would have a made media behemoth of a deal.
2. Lachlan Murdoch is the co-executive chairmen
3.Fox owns 39% of Sky, which last year saw the UK operation pay £6.88bn to buy out its sister operations in Germany and Italy.

In my opinion in simple words its monopoly who can get control of the money for the business and the power. This article is explaining that they want to have full control of the business as all they want is all of SKY and one point Rupert Murdoch made a bid which would take Time Warner being a big media breaking deal. However I believe that this is a way to beat there competition like the BBC and any others, I think its too much for them have power to all one person as it will go down as you need to have people in there countries have control as you know what they like and if this does get controlled one person rating may go down and it will also lead to politics in a way.

Sky Sports blocks BT from expanding international rugby with five-year deal

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/21/sky-sports-bt-international-rugby-sanzar



Sky Sports extends its deal for 5 years of international rugby meaning that BT sports cant get their hands on it. This would mean deal will stay until 2020 leading another world cup series for SKY, the 150 fixture-a-year deal includes the rugby championship . The reason why SKY does this was because BT had right to the heinekan cup which is big to Europe. In july, the BBC and ITV join each other to make sure that SKY does not win the rights to the six nations.

1.The 150 fixture-a-year deal includes the Rugby Championship, the annual tournament between New Zealand, Australia, South Africa and Argentina, as well as the domestic rugby competitions including Super Rugby, ITM Cup, the Currie Cup and the National Rugby Championship.
2.The deal offers the world best teams
3.150 games a year

In my opinion i believe that SKY is making a smart move as to stopping BT as they bought football Europa league and champions league. This is good that SKY is buying Rugby international because its what everyone really loves as to seeing their country play.  Rugby has got popular as to the nations and would be really good as to the viewer ship would be high and i believe that BBC and ITV should get the six nations as to making it fair also that BT have premiership rugby is good making it even have different type of rugby types making very precise what the audience can want.

NDM News: Citizen journalism

• Examples

In the article it explains one man getting injured in the LA as six days of rioting was happening and when Rodney King just looked outside and got the video camera out he got hit and beaten for no reason and this is an example of citizen journalism or trying to for the first time. Rotherham example would be after this was shown it got on to Prime time news and it showed that people who put this on-line the news would show it. 

Good example would be in 2004 the asian tsunami people with out knowing filmed this when they were in the wreckage and then they put it online where they news would show it on the TV and it was showing people accidentally doing journalism without noticing. Another would be the bombings in London provided another opportunity and it made citizen journalism big in the modern world.  

• Theory (audience reception etc.) 

I would say the action code is a theory I would use because of the people who use digital devices and then to record a big impact media problem online and then news to show this would be probably get people engaging. This is also an enigma code because people wonder why is there footage of a civilian how did the news industry get this and it carrys on by becoming this big story.

This is also Uses and gratification of people wanting the surveillance as to keeping updated on this. This theory goes with audience because they wanting to be updated no matter what they want information and the details. Also its personal relations as to talking and communicating with people and understanding it together as to a way of communication. 

• Benefits to institutions 

This is easy for the institutions because firstly it lets them cut jobs and yes its a disadvantage on the workers its also good because industries can save the money on people who are doing citizen journalism. They are in a way using the citizens for this and getting all there videos from them as to people having high tech digital phones now that can do 4K which is really good quality.

It benefits the institution's because of views and ratings that's what they also want they want daily viewers to increase and they believe if people posting videos footage will attract them the only problem would be if fake but mostly there is also witnesses and evidence. 

• Benefits to audience 

To audience get more footage and realism in the world as to getting actual footage of whats happening as we use to get only described and wouldn't understand. This benefits audience because its from a source which is not the industry that its actually a ordinary person who did the video and it shows the difference between them and the news. Audience use this to communicate together and collaborate with the story and discuss the problems.

• wider issues and debates 

This makes a moral panic that someone actually seeing this that there is a problem going on. the debates would be is it actually true? Do we really believe the source that comes out of a citizen. It can be fake thats true it can be unreliable in a way , the wider issues is that industries think they can cut jobs because of this and its hard for employment as people are doing this which is good but you can keep the journalists it would be good for other stories and also the cut of jobs put people in difficult positions. Censorship has gone ever since citizen journalism as we dont care what is shown any more.

• SHEP

Big stories like 9/11, London bombings and Tsunami have all been shown on people phones and have been recorded by civilians views have been sent out to people or described. In wider context even without video people use to to describe what happen and it would be said in interviews and the moment of what they feel. The importance of citizen journalism is big because we need see different views. 

Next, answer the following questions in the same blogpost:

1) What is meant by the term ‘citizen journalist’?
It is a citizen which takes footage of an event and posts it online and that it is part of a news story which will be an impact of what people want to see. It is the action of the people using there digital device to record or capture the event.
  

2) What was one of the first examples of news being generated by ‘ordinary people’?
 It would be the incident with Rodney king




3) List some of the formats for participation that are now offered by news organisations.
  They offer many ways to look at news such as apps and now on social media. They have websites on the internet and they also have ways to broadcast on the internet. They give photos and videos of what is happening

4) What is one of the main differences between professionally shot footage and that taken first-hand (UGC)?
 Professional shot footage would have the information on there such as the location, time and also the information. The different with first hand it can be blurry and the lighting is not great. Sometimes first hand the information is not correct.

5) What is a gatekeeper?
Is the one who picks news content 


6) How has the role of a gatekeeper changed?
 The role is that the gaterkeeper chooses what can be news and what can not be news it is the use of the point where now in the modern age all the news is on the internet and can find what we want.

7) What is one of the primary concerns held by journalists over the rise of UGC?
 The loss of job, if internet give news from people who find it first hand and develop stories what is the point of journalists to the industry. The big concern is the cut of journalits and how people can tell the news on internet.

Finally, consider the following questions and answer each bullet point in the same blogpost:

What impact is new/digital media having on the following:

• news stories
  The impact of news stories is that there is a large choice and you can have a story on anything you want from crisis to celebrities and it can grow bigger. You get news updates when ever.
• the news agenda (the choice of stories that make up the news)
  This no longer exists as for the internet they can post what ever they want and you can get it in seconds.
• the role of professionals in news
  
  They are dying as to people who do there job on the internet, the only way is either pay wall or cut jobs as it is getting easier to get news and now industries are falling.

Female technology journalists report abuse is still the name of the game

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/11/female-technology-journalists-abuse-zoe-quinn


This article discusses how women who are going into journalism or working with technology is getting abused and that they are getting worse. It is told by a woman having to change her name on her news stories because of people being rude and calling shouting at them on a phone. 62% said they were getting sexist abuse by men and this still continues in this modern age. Some women in Columbia have left journalism because of the suffering they have in news room and only 35% of women only work in the sector of work.

1.86% believe that women should be fighting this.
2. 31% said it got worse for women
3. 39% are scared of it getting worse

I believe in my opinion this is bad and that women should be fighting with the views in journalism. They should be the ones who are keeping head up and be equal for what men get and the views they have and that no one should arguing with them. I understand the comments as its always go happen but for people to go up journalists and verbally abuse them its not right. This is a big issue because women journalism is god any journalism from people is good as long ass the story is good it shouldnt matter. Women are giving up because of this and if they go it still an effect because they might be actually good.

Sun website traffic slips by 14%

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/15/sun-website-traffic




In the article it explains that after the transfer window for football all the news website has fell by 11%. This would be because at the time of transfer window it will be the busiest time. All other news websites have been bad but also good as for example the guardian went up by 11% and also the the independent went up by 10%. Worst hit was the daily star which saw average of daily visitors drop by 33%.

1. Sun had 1.1 million readers in September
2. Victim of the slump because of football transfer window.
3. MailOnline 13,365,390 (-2.46%)

   theguardian.com 8,370,243 (+11.28%)

Telegraph 4,419,480 (+0.11%)
Mirror Group Nationals 3,894,176 (-8.77%)

The Independent 2,780,560 (+10.32%)
Express.co.uk 1,213,037 (-0.03%)
The Sun 1,108,861 (-14.04%)
Metro 925,535 (-33.9%)
Dailystar.co.uk 570,609 (-35%)
Evening Standard 410,250 (-3.32%)

In my opinion I believe this is going to happen because of the reason of nothing big happening in the news and the daily readers only stop because the news maybe isn't great or they just find a different source. The different reasons why i believe it will be fine is because after a big story comes people will be checking the news websites and the daily readers will increase then probably decrease after this.

The article, Build The Wall, is available here on the Columbia Journalism Review website.

Your tasks are as follows:

1) Read the article in full.

2) Create a blogpost on your MEST3 Exam Blog called 'Build The Wall analysis'. 

3) Summarise each section in one sentence:

• Section 1 (To all of the bystanders reading this…)
  Explains that the news content on-line should be bought not to be free.
• Section 2 (Truth is, a halting movement toward...)
  Questions if we are losing on good journalism and by how entertainment has made money in the past, however does not make enough money from advertisement.
• Section 3 (Beyond Mr. Sulzberger and Ms. Weymouth…)
  Talks about the wall street and how everyone was distracted by that in 1921, HBO is also explained in it as starting but improving.
• Section 4 (For the industry, it is later than it should be…)
  Gives four scenarios on how Times and post will survive because of its unique and advertisement they have.

4) Summarise David Simon’s overall argument in 250 words.
David Simon's overall argument is explained to be about  online news being free and that there is no money for the industry. He explains why we need the pay wall for news sites as there are good unique news out there but for free where the sites can only make money from the advertisement. He believes that people should pay for this content as to making money for industries. He explains that Times and the post will survive because of the pay wall and the million of suibscirbers they have. He believes thy would be able to survive digitally if the content was put on a pay wall. He uses examples of when in  1995 the internet was just a whisper to him and now it has grown to this global use that everyone needs. His thoughts are to increase the pay rates for the content if paper to make people actually buy this . He believes that it shouldnt be free in the future because of industries and news dying and he believes that you need the news to keep us updated. In the article he exaplins about HBO and how it started bad with its content but it got better and that with the Times and Post that this could happen it gets better. Believes that journalism is dying as to questioning himself as to is there any quality in the written news today? He believes that the revenue is going bad for the news industries and that the paywall will give it a stream that will keep it balance of not making a loss.

5) Read this response to the article by Dave Levy, criticising and disagreeing with David Simon's viewpoint. What references to new and digital media can you find in Levy's response?

6) Finally, what is your own opinion? Do you agree that newspapers need to put online content behind a paywall in order for the journalism industry to survive? Would you be willing to pay for news online? Critical autonomy is the key skill in A2 Media - you need to be able form opinions on these issues.

In my opinion i believe that the response by Dave Levy is correct as to the article being quite dramatic as to relating free news content and relates it to 1921 air ships. This argument is valid as to agreeing with what Dave Levy is saying as for example about how Simon wants unique journalism and thinks its dangered because of that and believes that it should be paid for and not be read if its not a experienced journalist who knows the news. In my opinion i believe that shouldnt be a paywall for news as if it was starting i would say yes but because society has been used to getting their news in a free way it shouldnt be changed. The view Dave Levy trying to say is that News can be created and shared because the use of technology and either way information will get passed. I agree with this because no matter what people will talk about the news and spread it on whats happening. I believe that if had to and when older i would have to pay for the news as i need it to update me in life but there will be websites that will just tell me. In my opinion i beleive journalism wont die because we are all Journalists in a way and we will always tell the news around us and far away from us. Lastly i believe that even if the pay wall comes in they will be people who want a unique and bold story as they believed that if that what people want it shows there is a type of audience who will pay.

Rupert Murdoch implies Obama is not 'real black president' in tweet praising Ben Carson

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/08/rupert-murdoch-obama-not-real-black-president-tweet-ben-carson

Media billionaire Rupert Murdoch implies that Obama is not a 'real black president' by his tweets. Murdoch has been praising Ben Carson and been wanting him to be next president in line.However Murdoch does make some problems as to saying that Carson  is a real black president to happen. Murdoch believes that Carson is a real black president because of the history of his family and that apparently makes him 'more black' than Obama. Murdoch touched upon saying Obama is not African American as to the experience Obama had and that his mother was white and that Obama ancestors wasnt slaves.

1. Ben Carson has a book that Rupert Murdoch loves and tells everyone to read

2. Ben Carson is a neurosurgeon

3.Thinks he can change the racial divide 

In my opinion i believe that Rupert Murdoch is out of line with what he said and that it was wrong for to imply that Obama is not a real black president because of heritage. This is a problem of what Murdoch can say because he can get away with it because of money and power he has. I disagree about Murdoch tweets and i know he is supporting Ben Carson but hes also making him look bad saying hes a real black president.

BBC defends right to make shows such as Strictly Come Dancing

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/07/bbc-defends-right-shows-such-as-strictly-come-dancing

This article explains about the Green report of the BBC, green report is what BBC is suppose to be and it means what they really focus on. They focus on Informing, educating and entertaining their audience. The article discusses that people  are getting more entertainment that news and it explains people believe that BBC will have to change as to the prime time TV shows it has like Strictly come dancing.

1. BBC will say 27% of prime time conent on BBC1 is factual
2. Green report is what BBC follows by law and what it is suppose give their audience
3.BBC insider said that the public expects entertainment

In my opinion i believe that BBC should follow its Green report and that the report shouldn't even be changed because different views that its about advertising. Either way BBC beats its compeittiors with what it shows. For example critic said that it was debatable because of being overly commercial  yet they changed their mind and said it was admirable. There are different views on the BBC as to the license fee getting increased because of the content. It is a asset for Britain and one that will change evolve is what one of the sources said and I agree with that. The reason would be because main action of BBC was informing and educating but also people want entertainment and to develop on that. 

Newspapers: The effect of online technology

Blog tasks

Based on the handout you've read and the links provided, answer these questions on your blog with detailed, in-depth paragraphs. Remember, critical autonomy means forming your own opinions on these issues.

1) Do you agree with James Murdoch that the BBC should not be allowed to provide free news online? Why?
I believe that James Murdoch has a point about how the BBC shouldn't allow there online news content to be free. It makes it harder for the other institutions who charge for their content. What James Murdoch is saying is to just put a price for the content and a subscription because BBC is giving high valued news for free and making all other news websites down as they dont make money at all making it difficult. 

2) Read this blog on the Times paywall three years on.

3) Was Rupert Murdoch right to put his news content (The Times, The Sun) behind a paywall?
I think if he believes his news content is high value that people would have to pay then he can its the choice of the audience if they want to. He believes that "The world is changing  and newspapers have to adapt" and what he does here is treat it as a newspaper as people get yesterdays news today and updated.
4) Choose two comments from below the Times paywall article - one that argues in favour of the paywall and one that argues against. Copy a quote from each and explain which YOU agree with and why.

.@NewsCorp's UK CEO Mike Darcey on Times 140,000 paid subscribers & growing revenue from engaged readers http://bit.ly/11cDyYa  h/t @psmith

This comment is said to be showing the enjoyment of the readers. It is to show the money that the Times is making and the subscribers who are building up and this could lead somewhere.

 @rajunarisetti @newscorp @psmith but what are they really buying?

http://crave.cnet.co.uk/laptops/nexus-7-for-50-when-you-subscribe-to-the-times-tablet-app-50009904/ …

This is explaining are we really paying for the news or just the Times advertisement as to showing the nexus 7 ad for it. They're giving advertisement methods to engage audience and the person commenting is suggesting is that what we really buying as to not showing the content which can be shown as there is a pay wall.

5) Read this article from the Media Briefing on the continuing decline of the newspaper industry. 

6) Why do you think the Evening Standard has bucked the trend and increased circulation and profit in the last two years?
Because of how newspapers they have made as they say 700,000 a day its more likely to 900,000 as they are pushing for increase of circulation. They made a 27% increase of circulation by the ABC. However they lost 5% of their audiences meaning in that period it was going down slowly.
7) Is there any hope for the newspaper industry or will it eventually die out? Provide a detailed response to this question explaining and justifying your opinion.

In my opinion i believe that newspapers will go down, this would be by the use of digital devices and the digital content you can exceed with, newspapers cant go back up traditionally in percentages because if so it would be a niche audience who would like it. Rupert Murdoch is right that newspapers have adapt to the use of new technology but it would be too late as maybe getting money however its the audience who would still follow them. Advertisement right now is what saving newspaper industry and also the people who for them to carry as for the reason  they think its important.

The future of newspapers

Read this article from the Economist on the future of newspapers.

On your blog, write a paragraph summarising the argument the article makes. Then answer the following question: 

Do you agree with its view that it is ‘a cause for concern, but not for panic’?

Who killed the newspaper?

This is about Newspapers going in decline as to being beaten by the web. This is about how Newspapers are going to fall around 2043 in America. It is also said that Rupert Murdoch said that newspaper industry was river of gold and now he says that rivers dry up. This is about how the media is seductive and has control of the information that people have. This would be also be represented that at the start newspapers are big and were the bold information people got as journalists and now we look at any story to attract younger generations as newspaper industry is dying. The main role of this article is that newspapers are going down in society and people are not going use them in the future as media on internet are killing it and going to a point where people will give up on newspapers.

I agree on the view that people use any digital device and they get information they want just by searching. Newspapers are hitting at a point where they wont be bought around shops because of how big digital devices are. The main point is that it is a cause of concern for newspapers as they only would be making money by advertisement and when Rupert Murdoch says newspapers are river of gold then takes it back to Rivers dry up that's when you know  that its going down. But you don't need panic because we get the same information and news by our phones even though its the same to what we use to have we can now see things visually with watching video's of news or we can go back to old fashion reading which is written by journalist of information they have. 

Baseline assessment Feedback

21-D

WWW- This essay starts poorly but does improve with increased focus on the question and a variety of examples from different media. 

EBI- Written English is a problem; many of your paragraphs are very difficult to follow, jumping from one idea to another with no conclusion.

The first page is weak; no clarity of ideas or focus on the question.

You need to consider the other side of the argument that audiences are not empowered and institutions are still in control.

LR- Re-write your first page on your blog adding clarity and focus in the question. 

Through out the years newspaper industries have empowered audience to buy their content for a price and to get their audience to wait for the content as a weekly thread. Now 20 years later we live in a world where we can use any digital device and get the information we want for today and get our own content. This has revolutionized the way we get our content as for no price is needed like newspapers and we can get the information any time we want. The development of industries have let the audience have the power to do what ever they want.

While this is happening this would mean that the newspaper industries would be going in decline as to the reason of how people can access there news just by their phones. This would mean by the use of newspaper is being obsolete and also they would lose value as for the reason of Daily star now taking down there prices to 50%. News is suppose to inform and educate, this would go with the Blumer and Katz theory Uses and Gratifications. This would be Surveillance which means that the audience wants to be informed and updated all the time so they just check their phones and it would mean that the most convenient way would be using their phone. Another would be that no matter what the media will use moral panic and it still works meaning people will still use this as a way to grab attention.

The change of industries have developed where at the time we would just listen to the radio, watch the TV or just read the newspaper. We can now use apps, social media and pod casts this would mean that we are getting information from different sources and the advantage is that they may be true and give the same impact to people. We have now become 'Journalists' as we have the technology to see different views and also we have devices with cameras meaning that we can record anything we would want to see. 

Deezer to stream TalkSport's Premier League and FA Cup commentaries

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/oct/01/deezer-talksport-premier-league-fa-cup-spotify



Deezer a music stream service has made a deal with talksport to do live streaming commentaries on the premier league and FA CUP.Expects to make more than €750m in annual revenues by 2018 as to the reason of working with Talk sport and also people who want to stay and listen to commentary when out on their device. Has a global subscriber of 6 million people which would be good to move forward for them as their subscribers would be fans of football.

1. Competitors are Spotify
2. Will commentate on 64 games
3. They want to evolve with media

In my opinion they should do this deal as people on digital devices have to keep looking for websites and like to hear whole game.In my opinion they should do this deal as sport is a big factor in the UK and it will grow from people wanting to watch it. It is also beneficial that they are trying work with different countries because of this and i believe that this is good development instead of doing music as people strive to have more and develop for their subscribers.

Richard Desmond sparks tabloid price war by halving cost of Star editions

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2015/sep/30/richard-desmond-sparks-tabloid-price-war-by-halving-cost-of-star-editions



Richard Desmond has control of the Daily Star Saturday and Sunday he is made the impact of slashing the prices of the newspapers that is being created. Some people say that this is a bold move of him doing this. Some people believe that it will fail horribly as for the competitors will beat him like The SUN or the Mirror as it may bring out some excitement. One of people said the reason the Daily star is doing this would be because of sales being bad and dropping.

1. News paper prices are dropping by 50%
2.The Daily Star has a print circulation of 416,801 with sales falling at a rate of 11.63% annually.
3.Star won't be in many independent stores

In my opinion I think its a very bold move as to people not really using Newspapers so decreasing the price is fair. However competitors can be the problem of this as they might keep their prices up but if daily star are doing this could mean other competitors would have to go down in prices as well. This could mean many things for the daily star as to maybe getting more sales this time as to people not buying their content before. I think it is a big risk on him doing this to the Newspaper industry even though they are already in decline.