Law lecture- Confidentiality and Privacy

Confidentiality – official secret act and test of confidentiality

Privacy - Disputed territory between Article 8 (right to private family life) and Article 10 (right to freedom of expression)
In the public interest- not just of interest to the public.

Confidentiality

Here is yet another rule to the selection of important rules that Journalists have to obtain every day of their work life while reporting on current affairs. Confidentiality is run by Common Law

Everyone is allowed to keep secrets as long as it is not in the matter of public interest ( as long as it doesn’t have an effect on the public)

If confidential secrets given to somone, that don’t affect the public were passed onto the third party without a permission then they committed breach of confidence which is a crime that may be a subject to a civil action for compensation.

If the secret information is revealed to a journalist then this has the potential to be Third Party Breach of Confidentiality.

Breach of confidence is committed when someone passes on secret information that has:
1. The necessary quality of confidence
2. There has been no permission to pass on the information
3. The detriment is likely to be caused to the person who gave info.
4. The information must have been imparted in circumstances imposing an obligation of confidence

All of above must be used for the information to be confidential.

In order to stop confidential information from being published the person to whom the secret belongs to has to get a temporary injunction preventing publication of confidential material. An injunction against one media organisation is an injunction against all publishers.

Super injunctions are different. They have been broken by MPs using parliamentary privilege – and journalists using qualified privilege.

Privacy

Also known as personal secrets.

Article 8 of the human right states that everyone has the right to respect for their private and family life, their home and their correspondence.  It is unacceptable to photograph anyone in a private place without their consent.

Privacy mainly affects tabloid and celebrity Journalism.

As in every other set of rules, there are expectations in the privacy code set on grounds of public interest:
1. Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety
2. Protecting public health and safety
3. Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement of an individual or organisation.

Consent is an essential part in video and photo journalism. There are two types of consent. A journalist has to get one of them to be able to either film or photograph the scene/person.
1. Explicit consent: is when someone signs a written permission/ contract that allows to publish a picture or an article
2. Implicit consent: understanding of being filmed, for example in the crowed when everyone knows that the camera has a purpose to get shots of the crowed. If a person doesn’t want to be included in the shot they can just move away from it.

Public Interest

There is no legitimate public interest in knowing the whereabouts and behaviour of individuals generally in their private life despite appearing in public, regardless of their private live. A legitimate expectation of protection of one's private life is to be extended to be the criteria for assessment. A fair balance is to be struck between the right to privacy and the freedom of press

WINOL LIFE with Elizabeth Barnett

The new episode of Winol Life is now ready for you to watch. This week has been a high success compare to our last show. The organisation, preparation, and the overall outlook of the show improved dramatically. We should all be proud of our hard work and great effort.

This week we were honored to have the editor of Hampshire Life magazine on our show. Elizabeth Barnett kindly took out of her busy schedule to join our on-sofa discussion. Elizabeth was very nice and chatty, which made the show look so professional, relaxed and informal, which is what we are aiming for. She gave a very good constructive criticism to our features reporters but also gave all of us a really good advice on how to get into the industry after we graduate. I think many of us felt more confident about the future after our lovely chat with Elizabeth.

We used a variety of shots this time. We used 4 cameras instead of 3. The fourth camera was a PD170 that we had plug into an OB box outside the studio to make it work. That camera was set especially for the short yoga show. I thought it would be a good idea to have one of the presenters demonstrate yoga. I thought it would look like one of big morning shows such Daybreak. We also used radio mics, rather than long poles with gun mics on the top of them. The studio as a whole took a long time to set up, as in terms of production I would consider this show to be the most complicated one out of all the other things we do, which is Sportsweek and the news bulletin.

I also slightly changed the style of WINOL LIFE, trying to give it a little bit more character and making it look like a professional chat show. I knew we were lacking something last time we filmed it. This time I added headlines- a 'coming up on the show' character, which I think is essential to keep the audience interested and intrigued. I also made new WINOL LIFE strap lines for the in studio guest as well as the reporters, which I think also looks quite effective, but please do give your opinions.

The problem of the sofas:
THERE IS NO PROBLEM! No longer, anyway. We had a slight issue in the first show, as there were no sofas on the campus available for us till I spoke to Tommy Geddes, and who kindly let us borrow the sofas for the first show. However, he wanted us find out own sofas after that which was impossible. We even tried to get some money which would allow us to go to IKEA and choose our own perfect sofas, but that wasn't an option. After negotiating with Tommy, he allowed us have the sofas for the rest of this term, so for the next 3 episodes of WINOL LIFE

Elizabeth arrived at 1.30 and I took her to the news room where our WINOL LIFE team was waiting to meet her. I introduced her to everyone and showed her around our news rooms. Soon after we went through the script explaining what the show was going to look like. We explained the questions that we were going to ask her about her and we also showed her our features packages to help her get an idea of what feedback she would be giving live in the studio.

Once we were in the studio we didn't have any technical difficulties in the gallery (Hallelujah!) therefore the show went smoothly and fairly   quickly. Elizabeth is a natural speaker so she seemed like the task of giving feedback was a simple task and she did it brilliantly.

The post production was a simple process once again. The show was 15 minutes long and my aim was to have only 13 minutes which would be simple to upload onto, whereas 15 minutes is too long and we would use the good quality like last time and I wanted to avoid that. Cutting over 2 minutes seemed almost impossible. But with Chris' help I managed to cut out the most unnecessary bits.

Overall, brilliant show and brilliant production work so WELL DONE everyone and thank you for your hard work.



Hope you enjoy the show, please leave comments, critics and thoughts.

Winol 26/10. My first go at Live presenting.

Here it is. I finally found the courage to have a go at ENGLISH and LIVE presenting. Only a few people know how much of a big deal it was for me. But I can proudly say that I've done it. Tick on the list.

Only a few sentences about the bulletin:
There have been, as usual, many technical difficulties, especially when we went live. After my third link, the VT machine broke and the package didn't play, leaving me in the studio 'Add -libbing'. Fortunately, in the post production we got rid of the link and the package, leaving the bulletin looking tidy.
George directed this week. For his first time directing, he did an extremely good job. It almost felt like he has a natural talent :) So very well done for that. The production was as usually perfectly organised, which kept me calm till the very end of rehearsals. George, previously moved the deadline to 3.05, but rightly so, changed it back just 40 seconds before we went live.  It was the counting down before we went live that made me nervous. I unfortunately showed it in the first 3 links, but then the nerves went and the rest of the bulletin went smoothly.

The quality of news packages unfortunately decreased, comparing to last week's bulletin. The pictures need to be improved in packages and in headlines. They need to attract the audience, they have to be memorable. The script, of course, still needs improving. We need to use less complicated sentences and words. This week's script was in fact quite complicated and difficult to read, but it can definitely be improved in the future.

I think that's it for this week. It was an unusually enjoyable experience.

Hope you enjoyed the bulletin.!

Law Lecture, week 4 -Copyright.

Today's law lecture was taken by a guest from the BBC- Peter Hodges, who is an expert in copyright.  It is a very short, but very important chapter. Copyright protects intellectual property, which include products of other people's creativity, effort and skills. It covers music, lyrics, films, pictures, design rights, graphics, etc. For work to be under copyright protection it has to be original with lots of effort and research put in to the work. The piece of work has to be shown to someone as well; otherwise, if the work is hidden or had never been seen by anyone, then it is not protected. Copyright prevents from stealing somebody else's work. The owner of the copyright has the exclusive right in the UK to: make copies of the work, issue copies to the public, perform the work in public and broadcast the work.



When it comes to Journalism, there is no copyright in facts, news, ideas or information. It is the way the fact has been expressed and the news has been presented that makes it be protected by copyright, because it involves skill and labour. 


There are numbers of cases, where a reporter CAN reproduce someone else’s work without permission and without and without infringing copyright.

1. Defence of Fair Dealing.

Coping facts or news stories from another newspaper can be seen as stealing, because of labour, skill and judgment involved into the research. A reporter can use the defence of fair dealing for reporting on current events, which will sometimes allow quoting from another newspaper.
Reporters can use facts and information from another article, as long as  they don’t use the picture used in the article, as they are excluded from fair dealing defence. The author of the article/ information has to be mentioned and has to be made available to the public.

If you write an article, or take a picture you own the copyright to the work you have done. If someone buys a copy of your work, they can look at it or read it, but they cannot make copies of it. They can sell the copy they bought to another person, but they cannot legally sell copies they make.



2.Private study or non commercial research, which is not very relevant to Journalists.

The key that makes work infringe copyright is publishing it. Researching and rewriting someone else’s work just for your own educational benefit is not a crime, as long as the work doesn’t become open to the public.

3. Criticism and reviews.

This is another exception where it is fair to have limited use of copyright in work that includes a photograph. The work must have already been available to the public before you a reporter can use this defence. This allows for reporting which quotes from books, plays, films, and broadcast when writing a criticism, story or a feature. The reporting has to be FAIR.

4. Incidental use

‘Use is incidental if copyright work is in the background or subordinate to the main focus of the work in which it is contained’. It is an exception when a reporter honestly had no idea that the work was a subject to copyright. This exception can be deliberate in any case, except in the case of music.

Who owns the Copyright?

The very first owner of a copyright work created after 31 July 1989 is the author. However, in the case of work done in the course of employment- the employer is the owner. 


The copyright lasts for the life time of the author plus the next 70 years. When it comes to music it is the same but after author's death there are 50 more years of protection.

REFERENCES:
McNae's - Essential Law For Journalists

BBC College of Journalism (http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/collegeofjournalism/law/copyright/)

Media Law, Week 3, Qualified Privilege and other defences.

There are numbers of defences that journalists can take in order to avoid a costly libel action against their stories.

One of them, justification, as a defence means that a journalist has to prove in court that the libel statement is true. To justify their point they need to use relevant evidence. The reason for why justification is a difficult defence is because the claimant who started a defamation action against the publisher doesn’t have to prove whether the statement is true or false, it is in a publisher’s business to make sure they have a proof to defend their story.

Fair comment, however protects published articles which were just pure comments, rather that factual information. In order to be able to seek this defence, the comment has to be recognisable as opinion. It should not be perceived as factual allegation, but it has to be based on true facts. The subject commented on has to be a matter of public interest.

Qualified Privilege is a type of defence again libel taken in defamation actions. It is also available in situations where it is considered important that the facts should be known in the public interests. There are two types of QP: Statutory qualified privilege and Common Law qualified privilege.

Statutory qualified privilege can be used in certain circumstances, such as court reporting, public and council meetings reporting and reports of police statements. The published report has to be accurate, fair and free of malice. There is also a requirement for Statutory qualified privilege which states that the matter published must be a matter of public concern, the publication of which is for the public benefit.

However, Privilege at common law can be applied in situations where the law protects defamatory statements that are untrue, for the convenience of the public. For example, it applies when a person makes a defamatory statement in the performance of legal, moral, or social duty to a person who has corresponding duty or interest in receiving it.

The Reynold’s defence includes 10 points, which protect published material, which was then taken as defamatory, provided that it was a matter of public interest and that it was the product of ‘responsible journalism’

10 point test includes:

1.The case has to be serious- the more serious allegation, the more protection will be applied.

2.The nature of information

3.The source of information

4.The status of information

5.Evidence is essential

6.The urgency of the matter

7.A comment from the claimant is needed

8.The tone of the article- it has to be written in a balanced language

9.It has be to published immediately

10.A claimant has to have a chance to deny it.

The Galloway case:

The Daily Telegraph lost the case after making serious defamatory allegations against George Galloway, including elements of malice with no Justification, comment or QP. The reason for losing the case was that journalists failed the ’10 point test’, mainly because the paper did not put all its allegations to Galloway for him to deny before the information was published.

Here are just rough notes taken in the last law lecture. I also used McNae's- Essential Law For Journalists to help me write and understand the notes.

WINOL LIFE- October Edition

WINOL LIFE has finally arrived. (I know you all have been waiting for it!) Just a little background of the show for those who aren't sure what it is:

Winol Life is a studio based discussion where guests come in, watch a few video features that students have created, and then talk to our in-studio presenter about the feature in question. Often offering constructive criticism or just comments. A notable guest editor that has been on the show in the past is Laura Barton- features writer for the Guardian. This time we had an honour to have Sally Churchward as our in studio guest. Sally is a senior features writer for the Southern Daily Echo.

The first episode of the show went really well, considering it was our first time. However, editorially I would say it was just a trial and a learning curve for the whole team and me. We managed to make quite a few mistakes which I will try to improve and avoid next time.

The planning stage:

As I have mentioned before I am the producer of Winol Life, which means I am responsible for the whole show. It involves planning, organizing the style, inviting guests in, booking them a parking space if they are driving, creating the graphics and the script.

One of the mistakes I made this time was taking all the jobs by myself, instead of dividing them within the production team. Trying to be independent and almost selfish when it comes to work is definitely one of my faults. This is what will improve next time. So prepare for more work next time, guys!

In an email to Sally Churchward I explained the show and what the day was going to look like when she arrives. She seemed confident in her emails. After the show, when all the nerves and stress disappeared, I had a chance to have a longer chat with her. She said she was also quite nervous but enjoyed the experience and the show. We may see Sally back in Winchester when she comes with her photographer to write an article about us.

One problem that we had which was quite big and frustrating was the lack of sofas on the campus. I tried ringing around, tried the campus porters and I was unsuccessful, which meant that the show couldn't really happen as it was all about 'sofa discussions'. On Monday, a day before we were filming, Chris, Brian and I spent the lunch time running around the campus, looking for anything that looked like a sofa, or that could look like one. But that was also unsuccessful. I thought there was only one thing I could do. I went to talk to Tommy Geddes, the Deputy Vice- Chancellor, who has recently purchased nice, red sofas for the staff room at the university. They were perfect for our show. Thankfully, after having a nice talk with him and after asking nicely, he let us have two of his lovely sofas for Tuesday.

Another problem that we had was a technical issue in the gallery on the day. The gallery was a total mess when we walked in on Tuesday morning and took at least 3 hours to sort it out and even after sorting it out some things still didn't work. Dave, our technical person, was with us for at least 30 minutes trying to sort out the vision mixer which refused to work. This prevented us from having a proper rehearsal before Sally came in. This built up the tension, stress and nerves. People weren't too sure what they were doing as it was our first go at WINOL LIFE. Sally arrived at 11.00 am, I went to meet her at the university's reception and gave her a short tour of the news room. I talked her through the show again so she knew what to expect.

The post production was simple. I had to cut out one package as we ran over 15 minutes. I reduced the show to 14 minutes which was ok, but not great. The show as a whole was too big to be uploaded on YouTube, it took me and Chris 3 hours to work how to prevent the upload from keep failing. Finally, we compressed it in Final Cut Pro and made it smaller. That, however, ruined the quality of the show. While uploading onto YouTube the quality became even worse and the show is out of sync. It is not a huge issues, other than that Winol Life looks professional.

The show went quite smoothly. We only had one run through and then we went live. I was really pleased with how easy it was to film and how well we seemed to work as a team. Even if it wasn't perfect, we still put the whole, really complicated show together. It is complicated because we use all the studio cameras, we have a guest in the studio, we run all the packages and we have only one take.

The presenters: Hannah Keegan and George Berridge did and excellent job. They knew the script well and they were confident. The reporters: Zoe and Becky, as well as Ewan and David were also brilliant with their answers. Great job guys!

Therefore, despite all the mistakes, and technical difficulties, the show could have gone MUCH worse than it did. I think the organisation was brilliant, the team work was great, and if there was no stress or nerves, everything would seem to be more at ease.

We will be making mistakes in the next episodes, but that's the way to learn! I am more than sure that the number of mistakes we reduce more and more and the last show will be simply perfect.

Thank you to everyone for your help and hard work. Thanks to Sally for joining us and giving great feedback.

Now, it's time for you to see the show and decide whether you can spot many mistakes (Other than the out of sync. issue). Feel free to give feedback, as it is really important for me to know what I can improve for the next episode.

Media Law- Libel and Defamation.

'Law exists to protect the moral and professional reputation of the individual from unfair attack'.
My understanding of Defamation is a false statement of published or spoken facts about a person, company or organisation. It can lower their reputation or make other people think less of them without justification. 

The following examples show how reputation can be lowered and therefore, when a statement becomes defamatory.

• Exposes them to hatred, ridicule or contempt
• Causes them to be shunned or avoided
• Discredits them in their trade, business or profession 
• Generally lowers them in the eyes of right-thinking members of society

Journalists have to be extra careful with their statements, as they can be sued for anything that can’t be proved. For example, if a publisher tells a story about a person who is a liar or a cheat or in financial difficulties, the statement can easily be considered as libel unless the publisher has a defence, such as evidence.

Another ‘tricky’ thing that Journalists have to take special care of is words that carry more than one meaning. (English can complicate your life sometimes!). There are statements such as Inferences, which can be read/understood by someone in a wrong way. They have secondary meanings, a person could read them ‘between the lines’ and then can make a wrong conclusion.

The statement, however, can be protected by defence in libel law. A claimant has to show the court three tings when suing for libel:

1. The publication is defamatory,
2. A defamed person has been identified
3. It has been published to a third party.

It is quite similar to Slander, which is the type of defamation with no permanent record. Normally it's a spoken statement. It requires defamation and identification but NO publication to a third party. For example, it can be seen as a form of conversation.

Journalists need to remember that the defamed person doesn’t have to prove that the statement is false. If it is defamatory then it is obvious that the statement is false, however if the journalist can prove their facts than that’s their evidence, therefore, defence. The defamed person doesn’t have to prove intention or any proof of actual damage. All they need to do is to show the false statement.

There are four main defences that journalists can use:

1. Justification- The defamed person needs to prove that defamatory statement identifies them. On the other hand, the publisher needs to prove that the publish statement is true, by using essential evidence.

2. Fair comment- A statement has to be an honest opinion based on fact. No malice should be included. The subject commented on must be a matter of public interests.

3. Absolute privilege – It’s a complete answer and bar to any action and defamation. It doesn’t matter whether the words were true or false, or spoken maliciously.

4. Qualified Privilege- which is a specific protection against an action of defamation given in the first place to judges, lawyers, and witnesses in court cases. It is also a defence where it is considered important that the facts should be freely known in the public interest.

There are a few situations where defence cannot be used. This is when reporters:

• Haven’t checked their facts,
• Haven’t ‘referred up’,
• Haven’t put themselves in the shoes of the person or company they write about,
• Got carried away by an exciting story
• Haven’t bothered to wait for their lawyer’s opinion.  

This is a lot of rough notes and definitions, but they are one of the most important law rules that a journalist needs to know in order to be able to report and never be sued.

McNae’s- The essential law for journalists helped me write up these notes.