A classroom day - I haven't had one of those since 1977 and I found it seriously tough. Teeline in particular: I loved it, I know that I need to do it and I want to do it, but that doesn't mean that my ageing brain cells found it easy. I don't often feel middle-aged but every so often something happens that makes one wonder whether it is as easy to assimilate knowledge when one gets past 50 - I suspect it probably is but it just takes practice.
What did I make of the law session and, more importantly, what did I learn? Somewhat surprisingly, I found McNae's to be a decent and easy read - at least the first chapter was. I now better understand the structure of the legal system, what freedom of expression is and how it is limited. I understand the significance to a journalist of the rule against prior restraint, and where our law comes from. I've always been uneasy about the concept of 'public interest' as I think that too often it's just an excuse for the press to poke their noses where they shouldn't really be poking them - is that sacrilegious? Does a free press have a responsibility to respect people's privacy or does anything go? Is pandering to the lowest common denominator and the public's baser instincts what journalism is really about? In the case of the 'Red Tops' it seems to me that it too often is, and I look forward to further exploring that issue and being put right!
As someone who once spent three days being rehearsed by counsel as a potential witness in a trial where one company was sueing another for a very large sum of money, I was already pretty clear about the respective roles of barristers and solicitors. Amusingly, it was a company owned by a very well-known and extremely litigious public figure whose name cropped up in the session! The less said about that, the better!
I also look forward to the sessions on defamation and libel as I have long held the (possibly ill- informed) view that avoiding being sued is just a matter of common sense. However, I accept Ian's point that the pressures imposed by the speed of modern-day journalism can potentially lead to errors being made. However, I'm still to be persuaded that a dose of common sense wouldn't prevent those blunders.
That's all for now as mastering the Teeline alphabet is tonight's fun task - I need a stiff drink after today but I think that will have to wait until I've got the various dashes and squiggles cracked,
Great stuff - your experience is going to be a real asset to the course. On the pubnlic interest - there is indeed a huge amount of hypocrisy especially on the part of the tabloids and 'tabloid TV' (eg Roger Cook). We don't moralise about the public interest but - see especially my notes - the public interest is a vital concept because it gives you a degree of legal protection. True some journalists will abuse that, but there you are. This is why all jourmalists suffer when tabloids etc do unethical journalism becasue all other are tarred by the same brush. Glad you found the course hard work yesterday, but within your capabilities. I thinmkl everyone seemsto be making a good start. I don't see you lot too much for a few weeks beause I am still sorting things over three years of the degree - but I looking forward to doing intrioduction to journalism with you in a couple of weeks.
ReplyDeleteAlso once WINOL gets back into product the place has a different and more stimulating, realistic feel to it.
I think you are right about common sense in order to avoid libel. Put another way if you just make sure that everything you write is true (difficult term) and you and PROVE it (the difficult bit) then you are pretty safe on libel. Also on the newsroom wall you will see - fast - acurate - fair. As you will see thiscomes from the legel defence of qualified privilege. So if you (a) keep it fast, accurate and air and (b) do it in the public interest -then you are going to be safe.
ReplyDeleteBut it is fairly easy to be safe - just re-print the phone book or somethin g. The art of it is to make it safe AND interesting and that's where you need a detailed knowlege of how close you can go to the line - some things are more dangerousthan others, and that's where bsic common sense and a simple hionest approach is not enough.