Sexism: The Sidebar of Shame

http://stopsexismtoday.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/sexism-everyday-and-in-media.html

In the media today, women are STILL being exploited. You would have thought that in this day and age, being 2014 and all, we would be getting somewhere with the equality between men and women. Wrong. I think we have almost backtracked with regards to how women are being portrayed in the media; with the obsession of the 'perfect image'. 

Now, I'm not going to harp on about the existence of Page 3 in The Sun, and how it is demeaning to women. These women choose to expose their bodies, probably in hope of just earning a bit of cash and having their 5 minutes of fame thrown in on top of that. But, with women continuing to actually want to be involved with this - is the worrying thing. Why would you? 

Would you want to see a man completely naked as soon as you open your newspaper on the tube with your morning coffee? Page 3 has definitely had it's day, it's been overplayed. I would say, try and move on with times, but that's not exactly true, is it?

It's not even Page 3 that's even the surface of the problem with sexism in the media. Going through numerous articles on tabloids, and the Daily Mail especially - there are constant article titles objectifying women. 'The Sidebar of Shame', on the Daily Mail website just shows numerous amounts of 'celebrities', or 'reality TV stars' showing women either in little clothing, or with ridiculing headlines. Most of which, do not even adhere to actually having any point of being a story at all. They are usually commenting on what they are wearing, or their 'taunt stomach', which seems to be a popular line amongst Daily Mail writers. 

'In today's news', The Daily Mail shows an article with the headline: 'Kylie Jenner shares selfie in midriff-baring top as she reveals she is working on a 'surprise commercial' It could be argued, that okay yes, Kylie Jenner, 17, posted the picture, or the 'selfie', but I still believe that Daily Mail take advantage of a young girl who does just post pictures online for attention. Does cares if she is wearing a crop top? No. There is absolutely no story to this article, yet, I wonder how many views it will get?

Furthermore, take this year's 'I'm a Celebrity Get Me Out of Here' contestants. Every. Single. Day. The Daily Mail is filled with articles of the women who have made an appearance on the show. Usually in their bikinis, showing all their readers the infamous 'shower scene'. On one of the articles down below, about Melanie Sykes, the headline describes her talking about her estranged husband, before, obviously, mentioning how she 'strips down to her bikini for yet another sexy shower scene'. How has this got anything to do with the main focus of the article? Or, is this actually the intention? Sykes appears on the 'Sidebar of Shame', with a picture of her in a bikini next to the headline. 

Let's have a look down the sidebar of the Daily Mail website; these five articles appear one after the other. Are these stories even worthy of being called journalism?  

'Rihanna flashes her taut tummy back from Barbados holiday ...as she meets with Jay Z at Roc Nation's offices in NYC'

'That's modest... for her! Kim Kardashian flashes stomach in knotted black crop top and trousers at Dubai gala dinner'

'Good, clean fun! Melanie Sykes claims she's over her estranged husband - before stripping down to her bikini for yet another sexy shower scene in ITV's I'm A Celebrity'

'Hilaria Baldwin displays her taut tummy... as she continues her favourite hobby of showing off on social media'

'Where's your dignity, ladies? As J-Lo, a 45-year-old mother of two, is the latest middle-aged diva to copy the degrading poses of young rivals, ANNABEL COLE begs: Put it away!' 

Clearly The Daily Mail are obsessed with women's bodies. The last headline, especially, mentioning Jennifer Lopez, as a 'mother of two', (what has that got to do with the article?); describing her as a 'middle-aged diva'; even the words 'dignity' and 'degrading' added in there for good measure. The Daily Mail doesn't complain about young celebrities walking around with little clothing, but as soon as someone over the age of 40 walks out on stage in a leotard, all hell breaks loose. 

How is it that the media have the right to continually ridicule, sexualise and objectify these women? By doing this, it is seriously harming the thoughts of both men and women by having specific, yet completely unrealistic ideas of what women should be like. 

It needs to stop. 

A Lesson Learnt for an Australian Student: Social Media Risks and Defamation

Defamation is something that journalists, but also the public, need to be aware of. Defamation being, a damaging statement that can have an affect on a person's or people's reputation or business. 

Anything that is therefore published to an audience, be it print, broadcasted (TV or radio) or on the internet; is potentially libel. Libel is any any statement that is 'permanent' (but usually written). However, a defamatory statement is slander, as it is spoken, or in any other transient form. 

With journalism becoming digital, it is now likely that more people are going to be libel for defamation. Anyone can be an author on the internet, and their views or opinions towards a certain person are often expressed via social media sites. Due to the increased amount and popularity of people getting in to blogging and microblogging, such as Facebook and Twitter, it has led to the creation of 'citizen journalism'. This meaning, that anyone from the public is able to publish anything that they wish to on a particular topic, sharing their thoughts. They also offer first-hand news, by liveblogging events. Obviously, this does have some drawbacks with references to being libel. Information they give might be completely, or only partially untrue; possibly with more exaggeration than there should be. The way they write might also be misinterpreted as something else, making their statement unreliable. 

For example, March of this year, an Australian student, Andrew Farley, 20, was fined £57,000, ($AUS105,000), for defaming statements on Twitter and Facebook about Christine Mickle, 58, who had replaced Farley's father's position as head of the Music and Arts department at his school. He had personally not been taught by Mickle, but posted messages a year after he graduated, "suggesting she was responsible for the fate of his father, who stood down in 2008 for health reasons". This was clearly untrue, and had a "devastating effect" on Mickle, who had to take sick leave. As stated on The Independent, the Judge Elkaim said: "The defence of truth when it is spurious is particularly hurtful to a person who has been the subject of such unsubstantiated allegations."

Student ordered to pay $100,000 over Twitter defamation of teacher - Telegraph 

With citizen journalism in mind, it is evident that this is also a serious issue for professional journalists. Sir Cliff Richard is preparing to sue the BBC over their controversial live coverage of the police raid on his home, while he was in Portugal in August of this year.  It could be argued that the BBC deliberately tried to defame Sir Cliff Richard by choosing to film the raid, having a helicopter hover over the property in order for cameras to zoom in on what the police were doing inside the house; and stationing reporters at the scene before the police had arrived. 

In a statement, Sir Cliff Richard commented on his sexual offence accusations: "For many months I have been aware of allegations against me of historic impropriety which have been circulating online. The allegations are completely false." It is clear from his statement that the online community have also attempted to defame Sir Cliff Richard's reputation. He has not been arrested. 

Sir Cliff Richard: How BBC worked with police before - and after - controversial raid - Telegraph

Is being ethical important to a journalist? Or 

is getting the story more so? 

A Story with Storify

Curation is the act of finding, organising and then sharing the best and most relevant content on a specific issue. By curating news, journalists are able to find second hand information from different sources.

By using Storify as a prime example of a curation tool, users are able to curate information on a certain topic and create 'stories'. Users have the choice of being able to filter through various social media platforms. As Storify is able to aggregate news items from all social media sites (Twitter, Facebook, Google, Flickr), users can easily 'drop and drag' items from the side bar in to their blog, or 'story'. Aggregation is a collection, or the gathering of items. In this particular case, this would be the collection of news stories, and certain opinions from various sources. On Storify the user is able to identify to keywords in specific stories, so finding links to other sources is extremely easy.

Montserrat-Howlett (2014), described in her article 'How to Fuel Your Curated Content Marketing with Storify', that 'Storify is a social media platform with more than 850,000 journalists, agencies, and brands sharing stories...the link leads back to the original source, notifying the person that they've been mentioned. Keep a database of those people you mention, and nurture those relationships to build your following.' 

Storify explains that 'everyone is now a reporter'. 

https://storify.com/storify

Posts are then embedded in the user's own content. Before using Storify personally, I was actually unaware of the website and the curation tools it offers. 

Click here to see my Storify page. 

It gives users the opportunity to curate information in an almost interactive way. As mentioned in a previous post, journalism is no doubt turning into a digital 'era'; and Storify just further exemplifies this point. It gave me an understanding of how large the spectrum of journalism actually is, yet it was able to break it down in to a microcosm - with easy access to most social platforms online. 

By having so many sources at my finger tips, I was able to construct a clear form of story due to the variety of material accessible. However, the curation process was slightly time consuming, depending on how recent a news item was that I wanted to write about. It was also problematic whether certain aspects of the story I wanted to include were even going to be available through Storify. It seems as if Storify wants users to be able to comment on the most up-to-date stories in the news, going alongside its fresh and modern outlook on journalism.  

The layout in Storify is clear, although editing tools are limited. Users will not be able to personalise their layout, fonts or headers as they would do on a normal blog. Although I thought this was a slight disadvantage, it just highlights the fact that Storify is not somewhere in which are user would go if they wanted a customisable 'blog' as such, but their primary aim being purely for the curation of material and further publishing stories and reflecting on recent news material. 

By including them in your own 'story', they should be used as depth and context to your work; it was not intended, however, to be a repetition of other content. Storify posts are almost an extension of other news stories; I have found that users portray this information in an entertaining, and sometimes humorous way. 

So not only is Storify used primarily for curation, but users are then able to create their own content on their own views of what they have initially curated - this stemming from citizen to professional journalism. It has helped me to become aware of a new form of journalism that is arising; and how Storify has turned the act of curation itself into an interactive narrative form. 

Kim Kardashian: Breaking the Internet? Or Just the Work of Feminists?

Kim Kardashian - 'Breaking the Internet? Has Kim Kardashian completely backtracked the work of feminism trying to get features such as 'Page 3' off the media?

Women are constantly seen in the media to be 'mocked' for not sticking to a certain 'image'. In comparison to men, it is obvious that women, a lot of the time, are seen in the media as wearing much less clothing than males. Kim K's recent photoshoot for Paper magazine had the title 'Breaking the Internet', and to say that it very much tried to do this is very evident - social media went bezerk over these images.

One of the first images to be posted on social media was Kim popping open a bottle of champagne, a the champagne glass resting on her derrière, and the rest of the photographs were of her very much naked. Images like this are exactly what feminists are trying to avoid. There was also an immense amount of photoshop used, as well as a bottle or two of baby oil. However, it is clear to anyone, that Kim Kardashian's photoshopped figure is definitely an impossibility. Her waist is evidently not in proposition to her most prized asset. Again, this just surfaces the problems women encounter with an unattainable body image via magazines; and the media's portrayal in general. 

A vital question comes to mind - would a man pose like this for a magazine?

Agreeing with an article in the International Business Times, Smith (2014), 'Kardashian's nude photos are not empowering, nor feminist'.

In comparison to Kardashian's full frontal, is the recent topless picture of Kiera Knightly. Her message is stark contrast - to show her views on going against the use of photoshop. This automatically brings up certain feminist issues to the table. Knightley, shows her bare breasts without the use of photoshop enhancing them.

Knightley told The Times: "I've had my body manipulated so many different times for so many different reasons, whether it's paparazzi photographers or for film posters...that shoot was one of the ones where I said: 'Ok, I'm fine doing the topless shot so long as you don't make them any bigger or retouch.' Because it does feel important to say it really doesn't matter what shape you are."

Although many people can praise Kiera Knightley for her actions and protest against photoshop and a distorted view on body image; did she really need to expose her own body to get the message across? Freeman (2014), in a post for the Guardian, describes how Knightley doesn't even explain in the interview why she is posing topless. It is only later, when she spoke to another British newspaper, her reasoning behind her exposure. 

Feminists have their work cut out for the latest stunts from both Kim Kardashian and Kiera Knightley. Is Kim Kardashian REALLY empowering women by stripping naked, or is she just continuing a certain aspect of the media that really needs to be stopped? And is Kiera Knightley's unedited topless image in protest the media's 'perfect body' the way forward? 

The Emergence of Digital Journalism = The Death of Print

Is the fact that it is most likely that journalism is turning completely digital, an advantage? 

In many ways it is; curating and producing news becomes much easier for journalists. Using social media sites such as Twitter and Facebook, enables journalists to engage with members of the public, other journalists and professionals. There are many sites, such as Tweetdeck, Topsy and Storyful that enable users to filter through social media sites for specific issues and trends from the past, and in to the present. Journalists no longer have to do this themselves, due to these certain technologies that give them easier access to information. 

Will there now be an even more dramatic decline in the amount of journalism houses and print media? Will it even matter?

The validity and reliability of news on the internet is questionable. Evidently, not everything you read on the internet is true. But this goes the same for all types of news. They are of course, more dangers on the internet - people are able to hack in to sites, and create hoaxes. The most recent one being the outing of the world-famous street artist, Banksy. Rumours spread that they had uncovered his identity and he had been arrested. This, however, was revealed to be was false. There have also been many celebrity death hoaxes which have been created on Twitter, with the use of hashtagging to get it trending worldwide. Therefore, there are many people who take advantage of the power of social media. 

You have to be kidding me, @metpoliceuk. Banksy? There are so many criminals out there, Banksy? The great artist?
— Louise Mensch (@LouiseMensch) October 20, 2014

Graffiti Artist Banksy Arrested In London; Identity Revealed http://t.co/4x398fNVIF
— FWA (@fwa) October 20, 2014

Banksy not arrested: Internet duped by fake report claiming artist's identity revealed

It is clear to say that print journalism is declining in the industry. Journalism is definitely transitioning in to ‘The Digital Age’. News has now become 24/7; and journalists no longer have to wait until the next day to print breaking news. The use the internet offers so many possibilities to journalists. News is now being transformed on to social media sites, and is currently being updated in ‘real time’. Breaking news can now be updated as soon as it happens from Twitter, Facebook and news websites. Readers will now be able to instantly react to these stories, and are able to feel involved.

According to Paul Grabowicz, from the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism, as more users are looking at news content online, news organisations 'face the dilemma of reallocating resources to attract new readers and viewers while still trying to hold on to their existing, and usually aging, print or broadcast audiences'. 

He also argues that many of these news organisations online are constantly trying to 'fill reporting gaps created by the strain on resources at traditional outlets—from niche topic areas like education to international coverage to local community news to investigative journalism'. He makes a very good point, as there are many 'news' sites online, which are not regarded as being 'traditional', as such. Gravowicz gives Buzzfeed as an example of transforming this type of media: 'Previously, the site BuzzFeed content was viewed by some as 'frivolous click bait'. But in a recent speech to Kansas University journalism students, former Wall Street managing editor Paul Steiger mentioned BuzzFeed as “the kind of team I’d want to join,” if he were embarking on a journalism career.' 

With journalism now becoming digital, does this now make it an 100% advantage to both journalists and readers? How is journalism going to shift completely digital? Will there now be no need for journalists to sit in their offices writing stories, or going out to find them themselves? Everything is just constantly repeated throughout the internet, and is easy to research. 

These charts below, from a Washington Post article in May 2014, show what the Indiana University School of Journalism found with regards to how US journalists use social media to report the news in late 2013. These statistics just confirm the rise of social media usage amongst journalists, and how they are mainly used for researching and reporting news: 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-switch/wp/2014/05/06/three-charts-that-explain-how-u-s-journalists-use-social-media/