TV news is supposed to show us the most important stories from around the world. The reporters and the presenters are supposed to be completely unbiased and not give their own opinions. If it is a 'Window on the World' it should be a clear picture of whats going on and should really show both side of a story.
TV news does look like it does this job very well, as a provider of factual information that is unbiased about the world.
The starting sequence for the BBC shows graphics of all the different names for the main capitals around the world. Also they use lots of circles that are transparent which is supposed to connote that all their information isn't bias and is a clear picture on the world. Which brings me on to the next graphic which is what you see the transparent circles which is all the different continents from around the world, which again is supposed to show that the information from around the world that they receive is exactly as they got it. Also there are lines between the names of the capital cities which could show that they all work together to collate this information. This sequence ends with all these circles and the continents come together to make the world.
The news reader are there to feed us this information in a very monotone way as not to show any emotion as this would then make the news report biased and that can't happen. They are given the stories that are the most important and they then have to read them out. Unless something else comes up during the broadcast in which case they have an in ear piece that the producers can tell them what to change when and where.
The impartiality laws mean that the reporters, news readers and anyone else involved cannot by law express their own opinion on any story on that is aired on national TV.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/commissioning/tv/how-we-work/business-requirements/code-of-practice.shtml
During the broadcast the stories will normally start off with the newsreader telling us the headline and maybe a small bit of information, they then say 'we now go live to the scene live' or something along those lines. They then go to a reporter who is at the location and then goes in to more depth about the story that they're there to report on. But sometimes they cut to some footage which may not even be footage that has been captured for this story. The News has a archive of footage that they can use as part of story. They are aloud to do this as for instance it may be to dangerous so they would get some footage that they have got from that same country or maybe even the same place and use that.
TV news cannot actually just show reality, they have to put all their stories through a systems that they have devised so that they can pick the best stories for the program.
First of all they collect all their stories and then they have to work out the news values of that particular story. News values determine how valuable a news story, and how much coverage it's given. These stories are then looked into in depth and they try to get as much information as possible on the stories. Following this they also have to loo at the stories and see if there's anything that breaches the laws that prevent certain things from being broadcast such as things that require censorship for instance, if someone says something during an interview that is seen as obscene then they either have to censor it or cut the story if this is the only interview they have.
Also if the story is one that is in another country the news company will have to spend money to get over there and e able to record and report the event. This will cause a certain amount of rivalry between companies such as the BBC and ITV and their coverage on
the Tienanmen Square Massacre as it was at the beginning to the BBC's financial year so they had a lot of money to put into this story whereas it was at the end of ITV's financial year so the had poor coverage of it. There can also be late breaking stories that are more important than ones they already have the they have to make space for the story. Normally they will have a backup story, they would then replace that with the more important story then swap that with one that is going to be broadcast. Also if you have a live report from somewhere outside the studio and you lose connection with them then you will have to either wait and hope for the best or start another story and do that one when you get connection back to the reporter.
TV news channels also use editing techniques to give their stories some kind of narrative structure to make their 'events' into 'stories', for instance, say you have a story on the Middle-East and you have some interviews and footage they would cut from the studio to maybe the footage, then to an, interview and then back to the studio. This would give the news story some structure and make it more interesting in the process. A lot of this footage maybe from the archive that the news company keep as they may not have the resources to send a team out into the field or it may just be too dangerous to go.
The news in this day and age is very much the views of what white, middle class, middle age, southern, university educated straight males think is important and personally I think that there should be a lot more diversity in the type of people who decide what is shown so maybe some younger people, people with religious beliefs, people from different countries and so on. Also I think that if this were to happen hen there would be a wider range in the type of stories that are shown because they would all think that different stories are important, maybe you could have a story from each different group of people. I believe that this would make the news more interesting and maybe attract a younger and more diverse audience.
TV news cannot actually just show reality, they have to put all their stories through a systems that they have devised so that they can pick the best stories for the program.
First of all they collect all their stories and then they have to work out the news values of that particular story. News values determine how valuable a news story, and how much coverage it's given. These stories are then looked into in depth and they try to get as much information as possible on the stories. Following this they also have to loo at the stories and see if there's anything that breaches the laws that prevent certain things from being broadcast such as things that require censorship for instance, if someone says something during an interview that is seen as obscene then they either have to censor it or cut the story if this is the only interview they have.
Also if the story is one that is in another country the news company will have to spend money to get over there and e able to record and report the event. This will cause a certain amount of rivalry between companies such as the BBC and ITV and their coverage on
the Tienanmen Square Massacre as it was at the beginning to the BBC's financial year so they had a lot of money to put into this story whereas it was at the end of ITV's financial year so the had poor coverage of it. There can also be late breaking stories that are more important than ones they already have the they have to make space for the story. Normally they will have a backup story, they would then replace that with the more important story then swap that with one that is going to be broadcast. Also if you have a live report from somewhere outside the studio and you lose connection with them then you will have to either wait and hope for the best or start another story and do that one when you get connection back to the reporter.
TV news channels also use editing techniques to give their stories some kind of narrative structure to make their 'events' into 'stories', for instance, say you have a story on the Middle-East and you have some interviews and footage they would cut from the studio to maybe the footage, then to an, interview and then back to the studio. This would give the news story some structure and make it more interesting in the process. A lot of this footage maybe from the archive that the news company keep as they may not have the resources to send a team out into the field or it may just be too dangerous to go.
The news in this day and age is very much the views of what white, middle class, middle age, southern, university educated straight males think is important and personally I think that there should be a lot more diversity in the type of people who decide what is shown so maybe some younger people, people with religious beliefs, people from different countries and so on. Also I think that if this were to happen hen there would be a wider range in the type of stories that are shown because they would all think that different stories are important, maybe you could have a story from each different group of people. I believe that this would make the news more interesting and maybe attract a younger and more diverse audience.
This has some good stuff in it and is a pass. You don't discuss the 'gatekeeping process' as fully as you should and yu really need to include stuff on Galtung and Ruge's news values as that study is such an important one. You need more examples too - drawn from current news stories rather than just the ones we discussed in class. If you can do all this it could get to a merit.
ReplyDelete