Labels

Monday 21 August 2023

Media Regulation Discussion

 1. Should media companies be in charge of regulating their own content, or should the government have a bigger role in this, and why?

Media companies should be in charge of regulating their own content to a certain degree. This is because it promotes a more diverse reach of content that is distributed to the public, and often times opens up audiences' minds to opinions and behaviours of people from outside their own country. To a small extent however, the government should also be involved in it, to at least enforce the basic decencies that should be seen on general media. Things that may promote harmful behaviour should be regulated in some ways and especially not shown to the younger generation, such as explicit content, etc. Ex: Friends would have opened up new more open opinions within China if not for the censorships enforced by the government.

2. How does government regulation affect what we see and hear in the media? Can too much regulation stifle creativity and free speech, or is it necessary for protecting the public?

Government regulation could definitely limit the creativity of media sites' content creators and audiences. One example would be Douyin, where the algorithm in China is heavily influenced to promote healthy content, and sometimes not even show the garbage entertaining content that most people in western society see on our counterpart app, TikTok. China's regulation on Douyin is definitely something that protects its users and citizens from the harms of garbage content, etc, but at the same time it doesn't promote the younger generation to have more freedom in their own interests or future passions.

3. Do social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter need more rules and oversight, or should they be left to regulate themselves? How might this impact our online experience?

Twitter is widely known as an app that promotes the American view of Freedom of Speech. Twitter should be allowed to be run by its people, because although regulation and protection of the people is important, it is just as important to have a platform where the honest opinions can be let out, and discussed. For Facebook however, it is known as a more friendly app targeted towards keeping in touch with friends, and so a healthy amount of regulation that lets people have a good time on the app would be necessary.

4. Should schools teach students media literacy? How might this help us better navigate the media we consume, and is it the responsibility of educators or individuals themselves?

School should definitely teach the students media literacy. These days we are chronically online, and everything somehow would involve media. Being literate enough to see what is really happening and trotting on the internet carefully and mindfully is something that everyone needs to learn these days, as depending on the media we consume our opinions could also be heavily influenced, and eventually shape who we are. Consuming media safely and mindfully will eventually help us be more responsible with what we say, as well as be more open-minded people who still have values they hold on to. In a perfect world, where everyone consumes everything, peace would be as easy as breathing for us. Educating to get as close to that as possible is the one thing schools can do. 

Tuesday 15 August 2023

Dominion vs Fox News



Third Party Regulation




Trump vs Biden (Nov 2020)




Night before elections were finished counting, Trump saw that he was slightly losing. He came out and announced then that he wins this election, and that if he loses, Biden cheated. He then lost. After, Trump sent his top lawyers to go out on the right wing channels (Fox, OAN, News Max), including Sydney Powell and Rudi Giullani, weeks after the election to tell the public that the election was rigged, that Biden sent vans with fake voting slips, basically all saying how Biden is a liar and a cheater.




Powell and Giuliani kept saying they had all the evidence, but never actually revealed any of it. They won 1/60 lawsuits brought to court. Basically, both lawyers were spouting BS the entire month, bringing up the name of the late dictator of Venezuela of 10 years, saying he rigged the elections (tf(???)).




Trump’s legal team was so stupid they booked the Four Seasons garden centre instead of the hotel, and Trump wanting to never look like he did anything wrong insisted that was planned. The garden centre location was a car park in between a crematorium and a pawn shop. It was small, and dumb as hell. Giuliani gave his press conference there.






Dominion vs Fox





Dominion voting machines were supposedly corrupt. In 28 states the machines, even if people clicked on Trump, the vote would go to Biden. Dominion sued Fox News for $1.6b for defamation and spreading false information. No lawsuit has ever reached this size for a media company. They also sued Giuliani for $1b.




Libel Law

This is the defamation of character.




Actual Malice

When you lie about something, when really you know the truth.




To sue for defamation, the company needs to have proof of actual malice.




Actual malice is hard to prove, because its hard to tell if (at least an individual) is just stating an opinion, or is actively deceiving. That’s why it was easier to sue Fox News than it was to sue Giuliani.




Rupert Murdoch then admitted in legal court, that he never really believed Dominion rigged the votes. He never had any evidence of it either.




A bunch of private texts were revealed, it turns out that most of the Fox News anchors didnt actually believe these allegations since there was no evidence, but on TV they had to make the people believe it.




IN PRIVATE: On Nov 8 Carlson privately texted his producer taht the allegations about dominion were absurd, according to the dominion filing. Also that day, Carlson's producer texted him about his own doubts.




“I dont think there is evidence of voter fraud that swung the election,” producer Alex Pfeiffer texted Carlson per the lawsuit.




In short, they found lots of evidence that Fox News new this was a lie, thus they were able to sue them for Defamation under Libel Law with actual malice.




Sydney Powell also mentioned the voting machine company Smart Matic, which led to Smart Matic now wanting to sue Fox News for $2.4, hasnt happened yet.



- How effective is third party regulation?
In this case, third party regulation regarding Libel Law and actual malice made it pretty effective in revealing the lies that Fox News was spouting for a month together with Trump's legal team.

-Why won't US Law Section 230 apply?
This doesn't apply to this case as the government shouldn't be involved in siding with either right or left wing when applying media regulation.

- Should Fox be held accountable?
Yes, Fox as a whole company lied about even having evidence in these allegations. It is clear defamation with clear actual malice.

- What are issues surrounding Freed of Speech?
Freedom of Speech should be free as long as it simply states an opinion. When it comes to actual malice, there will be consequences and the government could avoid this by regulating a little better.

Thursday 10 August 2023

Development Target Audiences - Doc

Demographics:
- Age: 16-20
- Gender: Male

- Location: Int
- Ethnicity: all
- Education: Mid

Pscyhographics:
- Interests: Sports, Games, Women, Film
- Values: Center left/liberal
- Lifestyle: Incel, Rulebreaking, Active, Stoner, 
- Social Class: Middle - High                                                                                                                                                                    

Needs and Challenges:
- Lack of Game
- Can't talk to girls
- Never touches grass
- Constantly high

Media Consumption Habits:
- Watch on phone and computers
- Social media and streaming sites

Emotional Connection:
- Inspirational, Funny, 

Prior Knowledge:
- Toilet Humor
- No knowedge, just interest in people embarassing themselves.

Accessibility and Inclusivity:
- Subtitles
- We will ask the opinions of females because we don't have any in our group

Call to Action:
- Make the guys more confident in themselves in talking to girls and presenting themselves in the dating world
- Show success.







Tuesday 8 August 2023

Douyin vs Tiktok

WHAT ARE THE DIFFICULTIES OF REGULATING MEDIA IN THIS DIGITAL AGE?


Brief

Douyin

Douyin is a Chinese social media app owned by ByteDance, released in September of 2016. It has 500 million daily users in China. ByteDance is a Chinese company that owns several different businesses in the media industry including social media, news, etc. In October of 2018 they later expanded into the western market, buying the old hit social media app known as musical.ly, under the name TikTok.


Tiktok

TikTok is now a social media app similar to YouTube, having millions of users releasing content every day, with 1 billion active users a day. Its addictive short garbage videos have caused lots of controversy in the western world on its influence and people questioning its regulations. Although it has created lots of opportunities for content creators, it has also turned into an app looked down upon by the older generation.


Regulation

Douyin

- For children under 14 years old:

    - App is locked from 10pm to 6am

    - Max 40min a day

    - Algorithm influenced by government to show educational videos, museum exhibits, patriotism,              culture, sports, etc.


TikTok

- No regulations by the government at all, due to US Law Section 230. This law provides immunity from civil liabilities for information service providers that remove or restrict content from their services they deem "obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, whether or not such material is constitutionally protected", as long as they act "in good faith" in this action. It is a lot more free than the Chinese predecessor, but also gives way for lots of bad content that may not be healthy for the Western audience.

Link to explanation on China's TikTok (Douyin) vs the US 

https://youtu.be/0j0xzuh-6rY