2007 and beyond..
A Happy New Year to all, Prof Quinn and friends..
It is nice to wake up to freshness of minds, changing of the world's dynamics, mostly thanks to technology.
Amidst the well wishes and hope for a better year ahead, I find the last moments of 2006 particularly intriguing and somewhat disturbing at least in the context of converging media.
I'm sure we all have read, heard and viewed Saddam's execution, done hangman style. The latest reports featured mentions of amateur videos, filmed on a camera phone, of the former tyrant's execution and more importantly being picked up by major networks in the US.
The question raised in the article was about how the footage was caught via mobile phone cameras, the question of access of these gadgets into the gallows and the ethical dilemma of featuring such footage on international television/media.
We all understand the blurring of lines when it comes to sources of information and the changing roles of the media, but in this context of an execution, should authorities have allowed the entry of such unofficial gadgets to record moments of history. We all understand the repercussions of such information being made public, my questions is of control, or is there no control.
I believe then it would be relevant for us to relook at our roles, with this issue being the key theme for Time magazine's latest issue, on the Person of the Year
As most of us know, instead of featuring icons or personalities commonly done in past issues, 2007's piece talked about the general public, bloggers, people behind YouTube and the like, having the huge influence in how they or we shape the media and the world we live in.
posted by Susan @ 12:40 PM
1 Comments
1 Comments:
Hi Susan,
"We all understand the blurring of lines when it comes to sources of information and the changing roles of the media, but in this context of an execution, should authorities have allowed the entry of such unofficial gadgets to record moments of history. We all understand the repercussions of such information being made public, my questions is of control, or is there no control."
You are right on this. It is even more disturbing how the footage got on the major networks. Prior to the execution, I had read that the networks would deal with "underground" footage as it surfaced. No definite policy, in other words. That sounded like a wishy-washy decision to me. What went into such a decision-making process? It is obvious that the motive was different than what we would hope.
Now I wonder: would this coverage of the execution be rightfully called citizen journalism?
Chingbee
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home