4 WEEKS WORTH OF REFELCTION POSTS
- Jamie-Paige
- Mar 15, 2019
- 4 min read
Firstly, I need to say sorry for the lack of activity recently. I've been so busy with my social, personal and university life that I haven't even had a minute to sit and draft a quick journo post. After next week, when my exam is out the way, I'll be trying to be way more active again, so hang tight please!
These are short, 200 word reflections on smaller news stories which show our interest and critical opinions on publishes news articles. Slowly these have been making their way back to us with markings, and so far I have only had a few minimal criticisms, which is always refreshing to know. These posts come paired with a link to the original story, so please feel free to give those a read too:
The Jewish Chronical is very critical throughout this article. And this is understandable considering the context. However, it is written from a very biased perspective, but that can be expected when you have a specific topic. The content of the article is topical to the websites content in general, but also to life as it shows antisemitic behaviour in the present day. However, it shows the university in a negative light which is going to cause controversy.
I don’t think they take a balanced approach to the situation, as the only positive comment is that “64 per cent of respondents have answered “yes” to the question “should there be a Jewish society?”” considering this was the majority outcome. But obviously, over 200 students voting ‘No’ to a Jewish society is an issue that needs to be addressed.
The university prides itself for its inclusivity yet students are willing to shut down a religious society. So, you can understand the negative position the web publication is coming from. The mention of one specific lecturer is also problematic, as although what he’s published on his social media is unacceptable, it has impacted his career. I think shaming him online was not ethically acceptable, from a journalistic aspect.
I have noticed that the within this publication, the Bury Free Press take a very neutral position. However, I sense a lot of positivity within their writing. For example, the publication by Morrison on the new Travelodge and Starbucks is written in a way that really emphasises all of the positive aspects, it highlights all the new jobs that these businesses are opening up.
The quote from the Starbucks area manager, Claire Crittenden, gives the audience a ‘real life’ feeling. It shows the reader that the reporter was actually there for the opening, and got to see first hand what the new establishment was offering. The emphasis on the new café being ‘dog friendly’ also is likely to please a large proportion of the Free Press’ audiences.
Additionally, the Travelodge representative addresses the plans for the River Lark that runs through the site, including the ambition to get new fish into the area. This is important to the publication as it shows how supportive the local organisations are of each other, which is likely to attract local readers.
I believe that the balanced position taken by the Bury Free Press is vital, however they are likely to be bias about positive aspects to their local area, as that’s their key focus.
I think this piece is trying to be controversial on purpose. It’s addressing a subject that has been sensitive since Madeleine went missing in 2007. The content of this piece is to let people know a new Netflix documentary is coming out about the girl’s disappearance, to which her family have tried to stop from being released. The independent have written this piece to be pro-Netflix. The article is written in a positive way towards the release, and shines a negative light on the parents.
The use of a statement from the parents gives the article an official feel. With this being a big story, many people will be writing and sharing their opinions, however the use of the quotes from the McCann’s gives the Independent that extra bit of information. The use of the word “hinder” is important to this story as it’s the problematic part. Hinder has negative connotations which are being portrayed throughout this article.
The article however does lack any real information, for example they list what’s in the documentary but not with any detail. They also refer to “key figures” yet don’t mention who or where they found them. It does come across unprofessional as it appears, they haven’t fully completed their research.
The news article from this evening is one of a negative interpretation. It’s of a local man (Harlow) being stabbed back in 2017, however the new spin on the tail is that those accused of his murder, are now jailed for their crime.
The BBC take a responsible approach to this topic because clearly it is a sensitive subject. The BBC is well known for being unbiased within their writing and reports, however you can read the sympathy within this. The use of the quote from Mr Watt’s wife shows the real, and emotional elements to the story which I believe have been address in the proper manner and shows the support from the media, without actually having to say it.
Although this story has a sympathetic element, it is not likely to cause any issues as it is stating plain facts. The factual parts of this story are vital and are written in a blunt and strict way with delivers the points without divulging into too much detail. Harlow, being a local area for us here in Essex, means the men involved will likely be known by many and therefore the BBC need to show respect to the family of the murder, but also of those convicted.
Comments