Fatal Error will cost you a degree, but it won't if you read this blog post: Media Law Update lecture 1

Well it has been a while, six months to be exact since I did a blog post for all you lovely people out there in the World Wide Web. No longer will my postings be about the philosophical world of HCJ, but we are back to a topic that took over the majority of my blogging life during the first year of my Journalism course at The University of Winchester; media law. Now over the last two years I have drunk enough and had enough nervous breakdowns over WINOL to possibly forget the majority of the law that us as Journalists needs to be follow, therefore it was refreshing to be able to have a recap during the first lecture for what we are to expect over the next couple of months.

This series of lectures will be taken by Ian Anderson; former editor of the BBC Ten o'clock news. That's right the man who was responsible for giving us the dulcet, Welsh tones of Huw Edwards coming into our television sets every night for the last 10 years and beyond will be telling us third years all we need to know and this time try to remember in order to become responsible Journalists and not end up in the dock for libel or my personal favourite; Contempt of Court (not saying that I am intending to end up in The Old Bailey anytime soon other then to report).

Unfortunately Ian is away training Journalists somewhere in Indonesia, so for the next two weeks we have Brian Thornton explaining to us why we need to remember as Journalists that the law is paramount for everything we do when thinking about doing a story on absolutely anything. Coming from a BBC background he explained that the team of BBC lawyers (and no they are not 7 feet tall monsters waiting to pounce on our every wrong move or not what we were told) who will look over everything that the BBC broadcasts from the 10 o'clock news to Eastenders with a fine tooth comb.

We were then treated to a short video from a lecture given by Valerie Nazareth who is the head Lawyer for the BBC. We were shown what she feels student journalists need to know about the law when entering the profession. The main three things she feel were the most vital to learn and know were Defamation, Contempt of Court and Privacy. I will in turn refresh yours and my own memory on each of these terms and how they could affect journalists.

Defamation or slander is where you can make a defamatory statement about someone, which is not just wrong, but is also personal and insulting and could lead to them being ridiculed in the minds on right thinking people and affect them in their career. For a statement to be defamatory it must be publish and the person or subject must be clearly identified. However, if the person is dead there is no one there to support them, therefore if you want to be taking the mic out of a old Laurel and Hardy sketch (which has been done many a time by Hugh Lawrie and Stephen Fry) than this is better than saying something bad about a living person.

There are four defences to defamation, which are justification, fair comment, qualified privilege (this will only defend you from Libel) and public interest. The two main example of this recently is the two stories involving the Royal Family with Prince Harry's escapades in Las Vegas and the publication of Kate Middleton without having any clothes on to cover her up. In both situations there is a strong indication of public interest as everyone is interested in the Royal Family, but then they have the right to put in any legal action against the publication of these photos and the comment made about them in the newspapers.

The main difference between the two is the justification for the Prince Harry photo's are that at the time his secret service security had been told to leave, so there was no one there to protect him and stop the photo's being taken in clear public view. However, in the case of the Kate Middleton photo's it has been proved that the pictures could only have been taken by a camera with a long zoom as the area where the photos was taken was very secluded. Therefore, there is public interest, but there is no justified reason for the pictures being taken and that is why no British newspaper has dared to publish them in fear of the legal ramifications, which would more than likely follow.

There is also the recent statement that has been released from the BBC apologising for their reporter Frank Gardener who had mentioned about a previous conversation with the Queen where she had expressed her concerns over the prolonged legal proceedings involving the deportation of the radical cleric Abu Hamza. This is what was described as "Chatham House Rules" where you can report on what was said, but you must never mention who said it as it will encourage free and open debate throughout.

The next important part of the law we need to learn is Contempt of Court. If you forget this and get anything wrong there is a strong possibility that you will be facing a short or long term in prision. There is no defence against Contempt of Court, so you need to ensure that you do not annoy the court or do anything that will interfere with a active court case. Therefore, once a case has become active do not publish that the accused is guilty before the case has concluded. It will not only end up with yourself in prison and a heavy fine, it will destroy your journalistic career before you can say shorthand. The main example of this is the case involving Chris Jeferries who was accused of killing Joanna Yates in Bristol on 17th December 2010. He was accused of the murder by the press, due to his eccentric lifestyle and how he looked, but you cannot judge someone because they look weird and have different tastes and interests than most people. This accusation destroyed his life and has left him trying to piece together the reputation he will likely never get back, due to accusation that were false and untrue.

So, remember when reporting on court cases only a fair and accurate report of the day's proceedings will be acceptable. Do not make up lies and be very careful in sensitive cases involving sexual offences and children.

The third and possible most difficult part of the law to understand and follow as journalists is Privacy as  journalists we have to be careful that we are not intruding on the lives of people as this violates article 8 of the European Humans Right Act where one has the right to have a personal family life without any fear or intrusion. But, article 10 of the act gives everyone the right to free expression, which protects the press to the point in dealings of privacy, but these will be discussed further in a whole topic dedicated to Privacy later on this year.

This brought us to the final point of the lecture; The WINOL Fatal Errors system. This system protects us as student journalists from any problem we may face, but if we break any of these rules we are liable to no only failing our course, but liable to criminal prosecution. These are the five things that we are liable against and have no protection over:

1. Malice.
2. Dishonest presentation of sources/dishonest generally.
3. Causing disrepute/disruption.
4. Reckless inaccuracy in basic expression.
5. Legal problems (without justification).
6. Regulatory problems (without justification).

If any of these offences are committed do not just expect to say goodbye to a BA Journalism degree from the University of Winchester, but also expect a brief trip to Winchester Magistrates or even Crown Court sometime in the near future.

That wraps up this instalment for the week that was in TAB9's Law Lecture. Tune in next week where we will discuss privacy, confidentiality and data protection law. By the way my number is 07 (wait can not be handing out number of the internet it's a breach of date protection).

Winol Week 4..... It's the quality, not the quantity we are looking for!

This week at Winol has shown that the key to making a good news story is that ensure that it involves people doing something or being affected by something. This week started with the usual debrief of the previous week's edition and then came the lovely task of calling my contact in order to have a new story ready for the new meeting at half two.

I was able to use the story I had left about Barton Farm, but use a different angle that would see me show how Winchester City Council are struggling to create a housing strategy to build 4000 homes in Winchester in the next 20 years and to point out the need that local residents are asking for more affordable housing in the city. I was able to secure an interview with local Conservative councillor and member of Winchester Town Forum, Ian Tait who has supported the need for more affordable housing in the city.

I need to ensure that I had balance for my story, so I got in contact with the CPRE (Campaign to protect rural England) to try and secure an interviews about their views of protecting the countryside in and around Winchester. I finished Monday with interviewing Councillor Tait where I was able to gain a good few quotes that could be used in my story.

Tuesday was a busy one as I had to get into the Volkswagen Lupo, which has seen to have been renamed the WINOL mobile or the WINOL taxi service to pick Flick and Becky up and drop them to Marwell to film Flick's piece on Rhinos. I then returned to the news room and tried to get in contact with the CPRE who then passed me onto a member of the Save Barton Farm group who I hoped I could arrange an interview with.

In between trying to secure the interview, I had to drop Ali and Lee into Southampton for them to film Princess Anne who was opening the new police station at Southampton Central. After returning into Winchester I decided now was the perfect time to start filming, but before I could set off I had a phone call from Tom who asked if I could drop him into the outskirts of Winchester to help him film for his news story on rising energy prices.

Thankfully after last week it had proved that working with Tom helped as we were both able to help us film our shots for our stories and ensure that they were relevant to our pieces. After an afternoon of filming, I tried to secure my interview, but unfortunately the contact from the Save Barton Farm group was unwilling to be interviewed on camera and would only provide a statement.

I spent the majority of Tuesday evening watching Southampton beat West Ham to go five points clear at the top of The Championship (It is now only three points clear as of writing this blog, but we are top of the league COYR!!!). I got into Tab9 at around 11 and after a small argument with security who did not think I had applied to be allowed it overnight, I was able to use the combination of footage from this week's story and the failed Barton Farm piece to but together a good combination of shots into my package and then put the voice over underneath. I have been able to become more comfortable with editing with Final Cut Pro and decided to save the package and leave it till the morning and hopefully I could secure a last minute interview.

Wednesday morning was a nightmare as I called the CPRE one last time and they were unwilling to talk to me as they felt it was too early to make a statement on the matter and they felt the city council figures for housing may be changed. This left me with only being able to do a piece to camera explaining this in order to try and get some balance out of the story. After finishing my PTC, I went back into the news room and edited the final piece together and was happy that it was finished.

However, as we had no guest editor this week, Brian decided to take a more hands-on approach with our pieces and felt that my story was good, but it had was only telling a story from one view and that there was really no news relevance, due to the ongoing final decision to be made by the city council. It was decide to change my piece to a OOV-Act, which is where the presenter will explain the story over the images and then will follow with a interview.

After this was cut down, it was then a team effort and the news order was changed around five different times before 3pm and we had to ensure that all of the packages were in on time and to constantly check the news to see if their was any local, news worthy events that we could send someone out to film and edit in time to put into the bulletin. The pressure paid off as the bulletin was put out on time at three, but was very OOV heavy.

Debrief

Brian and Angus both felt that the main problem this week was the stories overall were not good enough to be used as a VT and were mostly changed to OOV's as they were not broadcast quality. It is key to ensure that a news story is about people doing something or something they are affected by, but this was not evident in many of the pieces.

The other problem is that we were holding the News Editor Becky to ransom as we did not supply enough back up stories to fill the news board as back-ups in case any of our stories fell through. Therefore, it was decided to we had to ensure that we come to the news meeting this Monday with at least 2 to 3 different stories.

It was also clear that we were not writing our script to the pictures and this is key to ensure there is a link interaction between the pictures and the viewer, who need to understand the story. Brian explained how it is key to write the script to the pictures. We also had the problem in the OOV's as the majority had no natural sound and it is better to have natural sound in the background as it make the story more real and will make it more interesting for the viewer, instead of only having the newsreader to explain the story without any sound.

This week was tough, but it was rewarding as it was the closest example to a real BBC or ITN newsroom than they had ever had in WINOL. Even though my piece was stripped from a VT to an OOV-Act, I fully understand that the story was relevant, but did not have the broadcast quality to be broadcasted as a full story.

I will ensure this week that I come to the news meeting with as many stories as possible and that I plan my story thoroughly to match the script to the pictures and tell a story that can be understood completely.