DOCSLIB.ORG

1 | Page SYNOPTIC REPORT TOWARDS the COMPLETION OF

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

SYNOPTIC REPORT TOWARDS THE COMPLETION OF PHD BY PUBLICATION BRUNEL UNIVERSITY MURRAY DICK NOVEMBER 2015 TITLE News Values in Online and Visual Data Journalism INDEX OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 RESEARCH AIMS AND QUESTIONS 3 1.1.1 RESEARCH AIM 4 1.1.2 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 5 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 10 2.1 SITUATION WITHIN ONLINE JOURNALISM LITERATURE 10 2.2 SITUATION IN AND CONTRIBUTION TO NEWS VALUES LITERATURE 12 2.3 SITUATION WITHIN LITERATURE ON THE 'FOURTH ESTATE' IDEAL 15 2.4 SITUATION WITHIN AND CONTRIBUTION TO 'TABLOIDIZATION' 29 2.5 SITUATION WITHIN AND CONTRIBUTION TO PROPAGANDA LITERATURE 23 2.6 SITUATION WITHIN AND CONTRIBUTION TO INTERACTIVITY LITERATURE 26 2.7 SITUATION WITHIN ONLINE LITERATURES ON VISUAL DATA JOURNALISM 29 3. METHODOLOGY: PARADIGM INTERPLAY 35 3.1 ACTION RESEARCH-AS-PRAXIS 35 3.2 ETHNOGRAPHIC METHODOLOGIES 42 3.2.1 INTERVIEWING 42 3.2.2 OBSERVATION 45 3.3 EXPERIMENTAL METHODOLOGIES 50 4 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND CONTRIBUTION OF EACH PIECE OF WORK 62 4.1 2010. ‘Vanishing Point: On the consequences of lost online news in the UK.’ Ethical Space, 8(1-2): 14-19. 53 4.2 2011. ‘Search Engine Optimisation in UK News Production.’ Journalism Practice, 5(4): 462- 477. 54 4.3 2012. ‘The Rebirth of the Beat: A Hyperlocal News-gathering model.’ Journalism Practice 6(5-6): 754-765. 55 4.4 2013. Search: Theory and Practice in Journalism Online. London: Palgrave MacMillan. 56 4.5 2014. ‘Interactive Infographics and News Values.' Digital Journalism, 2(4), 490-506. 57 4.6 2015. 'Just Fancy That: An analysis of infographic propaganda in The Daily Express, 1956-1959.' Journalism Studies, 16(2), 152-174. 59 5 REFERENCES 61 6 APPENDIX 75 1 | P a g e 1. INTRODUCTION This submission explores tensions in the (Gansian) ‘news values’ evident in the working practice and outputs of online and data visual journalists; caught between discourses of 'tabloidization' and ‘the fourth estate’ ideal. I submit the following six pieces (included in appendix) – a monograph, and five peer-reviewed journal articles, for the award of PhD by publication: 2010 (I). ‘Vanishing Point: On the consequences of lost online news in the UK.’ Ethical Space, 8(1-2): 14-19. 2011. ‘Search Engine Optimisation in UK News Production.’ Journalism Practice, 5(4): 462-477. 2012. ‘The Rebirth of the Beat: A Hyperlocal News-gathering model.’ Journalism Practice, 6(5-6): 754- 765. 2013. Search: Theory and Practice in Journalism Online. London: Palgrave MacMillan. 2014. ‘Interactive Infographics and News Values.' Digital Journalism, 2(4), 490-506. 2015. 'Just Fancy That: An analysis of infographic propaganda in The Daily Express, 1956-1959.' Journalism Studies, 16(2), 152-174. Collectively this work fulfils the criteria for PhD by publication, in terms of volume and academic substance. In particular it: Forms a distinct contribution to knowledge in journalism studies; Evidences a broad knowledge and understanding of journalism studies; Is the product of the successful application of appropriate methodologies pertinent to high-quality research in this field; Is satisfactory in its literary presentation, and; That it is (self-evidently) suitable for publication. The body of work presented here is a hybrid PhD submission; partly arising from research-as-praxis developed over my ten years of working in journalism, and partly arising from empirical cultural studies and social scientific research epistemologies. Each output within this submission represents a point along the phenomenological arc of my contribution to new knowledge and understanding in the practice (and study) of online journalism. Collectively it represents a rigorous and significant challenge to the conventional way in which journalism is often understood within the academy; compromised between vocational and liberal arts approaches (Skinner et al 2001). My research is concerned with how news values are operationalized in two (relatively) new and related fields; online journalism and visual data journalism. Each work is, in turn, concerned with the interconnection between technology and process in the working cultures of these two fields. I found that the news values of the professionals who work here, defined with reference to Gans (1979), are broadly the same ‘fourth estate’ news values embraced within more traditional journalistic cultures. However, some non-journalistic values find voice too, amidst the constraints of organisational norms. While the online environment represents new ethical challenges for journalists (Dick 2010 I; Dick 2013), in national newsrooms across the UK, editorial judgement continues to drive journalistic work online; whether in the fields of trend-spotting (Dick 2011), news- gathering, beat-reporting (Dick 2012), interactive design or investigative journalism driven by 'big data' (Dick 2014). But just as these journalistic norms are seen to guide approach and judgement today, this was not always the case in visual data journalism. On the contrary, I find that the origins of infographics in UK news lie in cold war propaganda, rather than in the ‘fourth estate’ ideal (Dick 2015). The rise of visual culture, and of tabloidization; and the growing sense of self-confidence and autonomy amongst those specialists working in 2 | P a g e networked newsrooms, all represent essential context for our better understanding of contemporary practice in online and visual data journalism in the UK. 1.1 RESEARCH AIMS AND QUESTIONS Research questions must be answerable, that is capable of being answered within the context of the time-frame of a research project (Andrews 2003: 3). Throughout the research, and in each of the discrete research projects presented here, I sought to identify a series of questions towards answering one general, over-arching research aim, in the hope that this approach may yield nuanced understanding (and new knowledge) of news values in online and visual-data journalism. In essence this process involved a refining process [or 'tightening of aperture' (Andrews 2003: 10)] that in turn defined “the shape, direction and progress of the research” (Andrews 2003: 4). The primary influences over this refining process may be understood in terms of 'orienting decisions' (Cohen et al 2000:74); that is, each research project was informed by a series of structural factors which influenced its shape and design. In distinguishing my general aim from various research questions, I sought to ensure that each discrete research project was both manageable and workable (Andrews 2003: 24). Two approaches to identifying research questions were employed across the body of works presented here; some represent an attempt to identify, isolate and interrogate a particular manifestation of the general aim; others arose during the various literature reviews undertaken. In moving from a broad aim oriented around 'an investigation' to a series of 'what are' questions, my intention has been to tighten the 'aperture' to focus on applied news values in different contexts. Though 'what are' questions may be answered in several ways (using different methodological approaches), in terms of qualitative research, I have found them to be particularly well suited to yielding 'thick description' (Geertz 1973). In the remainder of this section, I will set out and justify my research aim and each of my research questions, in each case factoring in (where appropriate) the following key elements: Inspiration (and where appropriate, influences in extant literatures) Key definitions (that both contextualise and set the bounds of this research) 'Answerability' 'Workability' 'Aperture' 'Orienting decisions' 1.1.1 RESEARCH AIM To investigate news values in online and visual data journalism; and the extent to which these values tend towards 'tabloidization', or the 'fourth estate' ideal. Inspired in the first instance by my own experiences in the field, and latterly by a long-established body of organisational studies of the newsroom (Tunstall 1971; Schlesinger 1978; Tuchman 1978; Gans, 1979; Fishman 1980), this research aim seeks to tease out the tensions between theory and practice in two relatively new fields of news-work. By delimiting all but one of the studies presented here to a particular theorisation of news values (Gansian 1979), my intention was to tighten the theoretical aperture in what is a contested (and not to say 3 | P a g e disputed) field of study (Wahl-Jorgensen and Hanitzsch 2009: 10). I position my work amongst other studies of the phenomenon as a socially constructed phenomenon in the newsroom (in terms of values and decision- making). There is one exception to this approach within the works I present here; my study of infographic propaganda may more appropriately sit within a foundationalist approach to news values, what may otherwise been described as a 'uses and gratifications' approach. For the sake of this research, 'online journalism' may be defined as: News and other forms of journalistic output that is distributed via websites, social media, RSS feeds, email newsletters, and other forms of online communication. (Harcup 2014: 220) Though much of my working life has involved training journalists working across various media (from radio, to television, print and online), the process of research carried out online remains consistent; and indeed all but one of the works presented here are exclusively concerned with discrete manifestations of journalism that can only be enacted online (database research, newsgathering and beat-building; un-publishing; search engine optimisation
Recommended publications
  • Actas V Seminario Internacional Sobre Arte Público En Latinoamérica, 2017

    Actas V Seminario Internacional Sobre Arte Público En Latinoamérica, 2017

    Intervenciones estético-políticas en el arte público latinoamericano TERESA ESPANTOSO RODRÍGUEZ CAROLINA VANEGAS CARRASCO ANA MARÍA TORRES ARROYO editoras V Seminario Internacional sobre Arte Público en Latinoamérica: Intervenciones estético-políticas en el arte público latinoamericano Editorial de la Facultad de Filosofía y Letras ISBN 978-987-4019-89-9 © Facultad de Filosofía y Letras (UBA) 2017 Subsecretaría de Publicaciones Puan 480 - Ciudad Autónoma de Buenos Aires - República Argentina Tel.: 4432-0606 int. 167 - [email protected] www.filo.uba.ar V Seminario Internacional sobre Arte Público en Latinoamérica: Intervenciones estético-políticas en el arte público latinoamericano TERESA ESPANTOSO RODRÍGUEZ CAROLINA VANEGAS CARRASCO ANA MARÍA TORRES ARROYO editoras UNIVERSIDAD FACULTAD DE FILOSOFÍA Y LETRAS IBEROAMERICANA DE LA UNIVERSIDAD DE BUENOS AIRES CIUDAD DE MÉXICO DECANA SUBSECRETARIA DE RECTOR Graciela Morgade RELACIONES David Fernández Dávalos INSTITUCIONALES E VICEDECANO INTERNACIONALES VICERRECTOR ACADÉMICO Américo Cristófalo Silvana Campanini Alejandro Guevara Sanginés SECRETARIO GENERAL SUBSECRETARIO DIRECTOR DE LA DIVISIÓN Jorge Gugliotta DE PUBLICACIONES DE HUMANIDADES Y Matías Cordo COMUNICACIÓN SECRETARIA ACADÉMICA CONSEJO EDITOR Carlos Mendoza Álvarez Sofía Thisted Virginia Manzano Flora Hilert DIRECTOR DEL SECRETARIA DE HACIENDA Marcelo Topuzian DEPARTAMENTO DE ARTE Y ADMINISTRACIÓN María Marta García Negroni Luis Javier Cuesta Marcela Lamelza Fernando Rodríguez Gustavo Daujotas SECRETARIA DE EXTENSIÓN Hernán Inverso UNIVERSITARIA Y BIENESTAR Raúl Illescas ESTUDIANTIL Matías Verdecchia Ivanna Petz Jimena Pautasso Grisel Azcuy SECRETARIA DE INVESTIGACIÓN Silvia Gattafoni Cecilia Pérez de Micou Rosa Gómez Rosa Graciela Palmas SECRETARIO DE POSGRADO Sergio Castelo Alberto Damiani Ayelén Suárez SUBSECRETARIA DE BIBLIOTECAS DIRECTORA DE IMPRENTA María Rosa Mostaccio Rosa Gómez SUBSECRETARIO DIRECTOR DEL INSTITUTO DE TRANSFERENCIA DE TEORÍA E HISTORIA DEL Y DESARROLLO ARTE “JULIO E.
  • OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On

    OPENING PANDORA's BOX David Cameron's Referendum Gamble On

    OPENING PANDORA’S BOX David Cameron’s Referendum Gamble on EU Membership Credit: The Economist. By Christina Hull Yale University Department of Political Science Adviser: Jolyon Howorth April 21, 2014 Abstract This essay examines the driving factors behind UK Prime Minister David Cameron’s decision to call a referendum if the Conservative Party is re-elected in 2015. It addresses the persistence of Euroskepticism in the United Kingdom and the tendency of Euroskeptics to generate intra-party conflict that often has dire consequences for Prime Ministers. Through an analysis of the relative impact of political strategy, the power of the media, and British public opinion, the essay argues that addressing party management and electoral concerns has been the primary influence on David Cameron’s decision and contends that Cameron has unwittingly unleashed a Pandora’s box that could pave the way for a British exit from the European Union. Acknowledgments First, I would like to thank the Bates Summer Research Fellowship, without which I would not have had the opportunity to complete my research in London. To Professor Peter Swenson and the members of The Senior Colloquium, Gabe Botelho, Josh Kalla, Gabe Levine, Mary Shi, and Joel Sircus, who provided excellent advice and criticism. To Professor David Cameron, without whom I never would have discovered my interest in European politics. To David Fayngor, who flew halfway across the world to keep me company during my summer research. To my mom for her unwavering support and my dad for his careful proofreading. And finally, to my adviser Professor Jolyon Howorth, who worked with me on this project for over a year and a half.
  • Working with Audio/Video

    Working with Audio/Video

    Working with Audio/Video Who on campus works with video/audio? • Network and Classroom Services (NCS) provides a comprehensive variety of services supporting the use of information technology in education. Their main service includes support for Technology Classrooms and other centrally scheduled spaces on both North and South campuses. They also provide support for video/audio related services as listed below. (Alternative contact: Beth Fellendorf 645-5526 Email [email protected]) • Digital Lecture Hall Recording Digitally capture and store recorded content for access via the web. This service mainly provides audio recording capabilities, but video recording can also be arranged in certain circumstances. Check Classroom Attributes for a list of classroom descriptions, including Digital Lecture recording capability. • Classroom Capture Services Record lectures, workshops or other classroom based events and makes them available on the web. NCS can provide these services in multiple remote locations as well as several fixed distance learning classrooms. The files created can be made available for on-demand viewing or can be streamed lived as an event takes place. These video files are often used for student review, as primary or supplemental course content and to preserve special lectures for multiple semesters. If you need to capture content quickly and do not require any post-production editing they may be the right service for you. Recordings can be produced in Real Media, Windows Media or Accordant format. Viewers can review a recording via streaming technology on the web and, if you desire, they can be given the ability to download and save the file. Live streaming is provided in either Real Media or Windows Media format.
  • Survey Report

    Survey Report

    R YouGov / Daily Telegraph Survey Results YouGov Sample Size: 1926 Fieldwork: 25th - 27th March 2008 For detailed results, click here % Headline Voting Intention Con 43 Lab 29 Lib Dem 17 Other 11 Other Parties Voting Intention SNP / PCY 3 Green 2 UKIP 3 BNP 3 Respect 0 Other 1 Non Voters Would Not Vote 8 Don't know 14 Do you approve or disapprove of the Government’s record to date? Approve 21 Disapprove 64 Don’t know 16 Which of these would make the best Prime Minister? Gordon Brown 24 David Cameron 32 Nick Clegg 7 Don’t know 37 Are you satisfied or dissatisfied with Gordon Brown as Prime Minister? Satisfied 23 Dissatisfied 63 Don’t know 14 Do you think that David Cameron is or is not proving a good leader of the Conservative Party? Is proving a good leader 44 Is not proving a good leader 34 Don’t know 23 If you had to choose which would you prefer to see after the next election a Conservative government led by David Cameron or a Labour government led by Gordon Brown? Conservative government led by David Cameron 47 Labour government led by Gordon Brown 35 Don’t know 19 1 © 2008 YouGov plc. All Rights Reserved www.yougov.com R % YouGov Suppose a Conservative Government were formed under David Cameron which of these three statements would come nearest your own reaction? I would be delighted 22 I would be dismayed 32 I wouldn’t mind 33 Don’t know 13 Which party do you think is more likely to run Britain’s economy well – the Conservatives or the Labour Party? Conservative 35 Labour 27 Neither 27 Don’t know 12 Do you think that Alistair Darling is doing a good job or a bad job as Chancellor of the Exchequer? A good job 14 A bad job 56 Don’t know 30 How do you think the financial situation of your household will change over the next 12 months? Get a lot better 2 Get a little better 10 Stay the same 20 Get a little worse 40 Get a lot worse 24 Don’t know 4 A lot of people at the moment are critical of the overall performance of Gordon Brown and the Labour Government.
  • Thecoalition

    Thecoalition

    The Coalition Voters, Parties and Institutions Welcome to this interactive pdf version of The Coalition: Voters, Parties and Institutions Please note that in order to view this pdf as intended and to take full advantage of the interactive functions, we strongly recommend you open this document in Adobe Acrobat. Adobe Acrobat Reader is free to download and you can do so from the Adobe website (click to open webpage). Navigation • Each page includes a navigation bar with buttons to view the previous and next pages, along with a button to return to the contents page at any time • You can click on any of the titles on the contents page to take you directly to each article Figures • To examine any of the figures in more detail, you can click on the + button beside each figure to open a magnified view. You can also click on the diagram itself. To return to the full page view, click on the - button Weblinks and email addresses • All web links and email addresses are live links - you can click on them to open a website or new email <>contents The Coalition: Voters, Parties and Institutions Edited by: Hussein Kassim Charles Clarke Catherine Haddon <>contents Published 2012 Commissioned by School of Political, Social and International Studies University of East Anglia Norwich Design by Woolf Designs (www.woolfdesigns.co.uk) <>contents Introduction 03 The Coalition: Voters, Parties and Institutions Introduction The formation of the Conservative-Liberal In his opening paper, Bob Worcester discusses Democratic administration in May 2010 was a public opinion and support for the parties in major political event.
  • Where Next for the Liberal Democrats?

    Where Next for the Liberal Democrats?

    Where next for the Liberal Democrats? Tim Bale Aron Cheung Alan Wager It has, to put it mildly, been a difficult twelve months for the Liberal Democrats. A year ago this week, polling conducted by YouGov and Ipsos Mori showed their support at 20% – a level the party had not enjoyed since they’d entered their ill-fated coalition with the Conservatives in the spring of 2010. Nine long years later, they were daring to dream once again: could it be that, under Jo Swinson, we would soon see the UK’s electoral map coloured with the same amount of Lib Dem yellow that Charles Kennedy and, latterly, Nick Clegg had once achieved? The answer, of course, was no. The general election that followed was a not just an electoral disappointment but a disaster – so much so that Swinson herself lost her seat. Not only that, but the party’s main policy aim – to reverse the Brexit decision – lay in tatters. Yet, despite these setbacks, the new electoral geography of the post-Brexit era brings with it challenges but also opportunities for the Liberal Democrats – existential questions but also, if they can exploit their new electoral coalition, some potential answers. This short paper hopes to set all this out just as ballots open for the party’s new leader. Putting the 2019 result in historical context The eleven seats the Liberal Democrats won in December 2019 may have represented a slight decline on the dozen the party achieved in 2017 under Tim Farron; but they also represented a near-halving of the 21 which, following multiple defections, the party went into the general election defending.
  • Ultimate Resource Guide for Authors

    Ultimate Resource Guide for Authors

    Ultimate Resource Guide for Authors Advertising ❖ Google Adwords: adwords.google.com ❖ Google Adsense: adsense.google.com ❖ Facebook: facebook.com/business ❖ Bing: bingads.microsoft.com ❖ Yahoo: advertising.yahoo.com ❖ AOL: advertising.aol.com Affiliate Sales ❖ Clickbank: clickbank.com ❖ Commission Junction: cj.com ❖ JV Zoo: jvzoo.com Amazon ❖ Author Central: authorcentral.amazon.com ❖ Associates (affiliate): affiliate-program.amazon.com ❖ Advantage (sell books directly): advantage.amazon.com ❖ Seller Central: sellercentral.amazon.com ❖ Kindle Direct Publishing: kdp.amazon.com ❖ Customer Support for Authors: authorcentral.amazon.com/gp/help/contact-us ❖ Kindle Pay-Per-Click Advertising Overview: kdp.amazon.com/en_US/help/topic/G201499010 Copyright © 2016-2018 by Stephanie Chandler 1 NonfictionAuthorsAssociation.com Blog Directories ❖ Technorati: technorati.com ❖ Blog Catalog: blogcatalog.com ❖ Networked Blogs: networkedblogs.com Book Awards ❖ Nonfiction Book Awards: nonfictionauthorsassociation.com/nonfiction-book-awards ❖ Ben Franklin Book Awards: ibpabenjaminfranklinawards.com ❖ Global Ebook Awards: globalebookawards.com ❖ Foreword Book of the Year: forewordreviews.com/services/book- awards/botya ❖ Nautilus Book Awards: nautilusbookawards.com ❖ The Eric Hoffer Awards: hofferaward.com Book Clubs ❖ From Left to Write: fromlefttowrite.com ❖ Book Club Reading List: bookclubreading.com/submit-your-book/ ❖ Meetup: meetup.com Book Marketing ❖ Book Review Targeter (Amazon reviewer software): bit.ly/bookreviewtargeter ❖ NetGalley (book review
  • Case 1:13-Cv-00990-GMS Document 25 Filed 04/01/14 Page 1 of 15

    Case 1:13-Cv-00990-GMS Document 25 Filed 04/01/14 Page 1 of 15

    Case 1:13-cv-00990-GMS Document 25 Filed 04/01/14 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: <pageID> IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE ) VIDEOSHARE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 13-990 GMS ) GOOGLE INC. and YOUTUBE LLC, ) ) Defendants/Counterclaim Plaintiffs. ) ) VIDEOSHARE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) V. ) Civil Action No. 13-991-GMS ) VIDDLER, INC. ) ) Defendant. ) ) VIDEOSHARE, LLC, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) V. ) Civil Action No. 13-992-GMS ) VIMEO,LLC ) ) Defendant. ) MEMORANDUM I. INTRODUCTION On June 4, 2013, the plaintiff VideoShare, LLC ("VideoShare") filed actions against Google Inc. ("Google"), YouTube, LLC ("YouTube"), Viddler, Inc. ("Viddler"), and Vimeo, Case 1:13-cv-00990-GMS Document 25 Filed 04/01/14 Page 2 of 15 PageID #: <pageID> LLC ("Vimeo") (collectively, "the defendants") alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,438,608 ("the '608 patent"). 1 On June 26, 2013, VideoShare filed amended complaints against Google and YouTube, (Google, D.I. 7), and against Viddler, (Viddler, D.I. 10), asserting infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,464,302 ("the '302 patent"). Presently before the court are the defendants' Motions to Transfer to the District of Massachusetts pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) and Stay Pending Disposition of the Transfer Motions. (Google, D.I. 13; Viddler, D.I. 15; Vimeo, D.I. 10.) For the reasons that follow, the court will deny the defendants' motions. II. BACKGROUND Video Share is a Delaware limited liability company with its principal place of business in Chestnut Hill, Massachusetts. (Google, D.I. 7, ii 4.) Google is a Delaware corporation with its principal place of business in Mountain View, California.
  • Privacy of Streaming Apps and Devices

    Privacy of Streaming Apps and Devices

    2021 PRIVACY OF STREAMING APPS AND DEVICES: WATCHING TV THAT WATCHES US Common Sense is the nation's leading nonprofit organization dedicated to improving the lives of kids and families by providing the trustworthy information, education, and independent voice they need to thrive in the 21st century. www.commonsense.org Common Sense is grateful for the generous support and underwriting that funded this report from the Michael and Susan Dell Foundation, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, and the Chan Zuckerberg Initative. CREDITS Authors: Girard Kelly, Common Sense Media Jeff Graham, Common Sense Media Jill Bronfman, Common Sense Media Steve Garton, Common Sense Media Data analysis: Girard Kelly, Common Sense Media Jeff Graham, Common Sense Media Copy editor: Jennifer Robb Designer: Jeff Graham, Common Sense Media Suggested citation: Kelly, G., Graham, J., Bronfman, J., & Garton, S. (2021). Privacy of Streaming Apps and Devices: Watching TV that Watches Us. San Francisco, CA: Common Sense Media This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Public .License TABLE OF CONTENTS Privacy of streaming apps and devices 1 What are streaming services? ......................................... 1 Apps we rated ............................................... 1 How do streaming services make money? ............................... 2 How we rate privacy ........................................... 2 What we found .............................................. 6 Compare privacy ratings ........................................
  • The Liberal Democrat Journey to a LIB-Con Coalition and Where Next?

    The Liberal Democrat Journey to a LIB-Con Coalition and Where Next?

    The LiberaL Democrat Journey To a LIB-CoN CoaLITIoN aNd where NexT? Southbank house, Black Prince road, London Se1 7SJ T: +44 (0) 20 7463 0632 | [email protected] www.compassonline.org.uk richard S Grayson The LiberaL Democrat Journey To a LIB-CoN CoaLITIoN – aNd where NexT? richard S Grayson 2 about the author Dr Richard Grayson is Head of Politics at Goldsmiths, University of London, and is one of three vice-chairs of the Liberal Democrat Federal Policy Committee, but writes here in a personal capacity. He was the party’s Director of Policy in 1999–2004 and stood for Parliament in Hemel Hempstead in 2005 and 2010, adding over 10% to the party’s vote. He was one of the founders of the Social Liberal Forum and was the first chair of its Executive. In September 2010 he takes up the post of Professor of Twentieth Century History at Goldsmiths. Published by Compass − Direction for the Democratic Left Ltd Southbank House, Black Prince Road, London SE1 7SJ T: +44 (0) 207 463 0632 [email protected] www.compassonline.org.uk Designed by SoapBox, www.soapboxcommunications.co.uk 3 The Liberal democrat ning both needs to be understood. Doing so begins with a story about how it is possible that a journey to a Lib–Con party which has often over the past decade been seen as ‘left of Labour’ on civil liberties, demo - coalition – and where cratic reform, taxation and public services is engaged quite so enthusiastically in reducing the next? size of the state.
  • David Cameron and Nick Clegg Are Stretching the British Constitution, but Our Confrontational Style of Politics Looks Set to Continue

    David Cameron and Nick Clegg Are Stretching the British Constitution, but Our Confrontational Style of Politics Looks Set to Continue

    democraticaudit.com http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=8468 David Cameron and Nick Clegg are stretching the British constitution, but our confrontational style of politics looks set to continue By Democratic Audit UK Few expected the Coalition Government formed in the wake of the 2010 General Election to last as long as it has. This has been made possible by a process of what Stephen Barber described as ‘stretching’ of the constitution, disregarding some conventions while altering others. Despite this, our confrontational style of politics doesn’t look set to end any time soon, with a power-sharing culture and tone of respectful difference seemingly as far off as ever. Credit: Nick Page, CC BY 2.0 Conference season before a general election is the opportunity for parties to present themselves as credible occupants of ministerial office. Three things are different this year, however. Firstly, the date of the general election is actually known. Secondly, the parties which have been in coalition government together for four years are openly distancing themselves from each other. And thirdly, policy pledges are being framed not only to attract voters but also as potential bargaining chips to negotiate a new coalition should a hung parliament result in May. The Fixed Term Parliament Act aside, planned constitutional reform has fallen well short of expectations since 2010 as House of Lords reform, ‘equalising’ boundaries, reducing the number of MPs and the Alternative Vote have all fallen by the wayside. That said belated pledges to devolve even more power to Scotland will be meaningful in time. But the biggest impact has been the stretching of the constitution to accommodate two parties in office by way of collective responsibility and prerogative powers – not to mention the new role of manifestos as documents to negotiate a Coalition Agreement.
  • Memo: Facebook Is Failing Its Own Election Tests

    Memo: Facebook Is Failing Its Own Election Tests

    MEMO: FACEBOOK IS FAILING ITS OWN ELECTION TESTS Facebook has failed to deliver on a slew of public commitments it made before, during, and after Election Day -- and the damage is far from over. In September 2020, Mark Zuckerberg said that for Facebook, the U.S. presidential election “is not going to be business as usual.” In October 2020, Facebook’s Vice President of Global Affairs and Communications Nick Clegg made an even bolder commitment: “Today we can say it: we are ready.” The weeks since have shown how woefully unprepared Facebook was to protect the integrity of the 2020 election. Despite warnings from election and technology experts, Facebook failed to meet a slew of important policy commitments it made to the public, including on misinformation, false claims of victory, advertisements, false claims of voter fraud, and incitement of violence. When evaluating the company against its own promises, a clear picture emerges: Facebook’s measures were inconsistent, reactionary, and inadequate -- often written to avoid responsibility and prioritize the protection of its own image above American democracy. FACEBOOK ON GROUPS (10/7/20): “We continue to take down content proactively, including in groups that are private. We also -- once we have misinformation that our third party fact checker has rated, we also match it to content inside private groups and that ensures that even those spaces are spaces where our [policies] are enforced.” ACCOUNTABLE TECH WARNING: “Facebook Groups pose a singular threat to this election season. They’ve become