Newspapers in Scottsboro Case

Burmingham News
Burmingham Ages Herald

huntsville, Alabama
Lafayette, Alabama

Be nice to people on your way up

Be nice to people on your way up because you meet them on your way down.

GI Underground Press

1969
Washington DC - First issue of OM The Servicemen’s Newsletter published.

http://www.sirnosir.com/timeline/chronology_GI_press.html
Movie "Sir No Sir" website also includes the chronology of GI underground press

Alice Paul Institute

http://www.alicepaul.org/alicepaul.htm

The Nineteenth Amendment

In 1917, in response to public outcry about the prison abuse of suffragists, President Wilson reversed his position and announced his support for a suffrage amendment, calling it a "war measure." In 1919, both the House and Senate passed the 19th Amendment and the battle for state ratification commenced. Three-fourths of the states were needed to ratify the amendment. The battle for ratification came down to the state of Tennessee in the summer of 1920; if a majority of the state legislature voted for the amendment, it would become law. The deciding vote was cast twenty-four year-old Harry Burn, the youngest member of the Tennessee assembly. Originally intending to vote “no,” Burn changed his vote after receiving a telegram from his mother asking him to support women’s suffrage. On August 18, 1920, Tennessee ratified the 19th Amendment. Six days later, Secretary of State Colby certified the ratification, and, with the stroke of his pen, American women gained the right to vote after a seventy-two year battle. August 26th is now celebrated as Women's Equality Day in the United States.

http://www.sirnosir.com/timeline/chronology_GI_press.html
Movie "Sir No Sir" website also includes the chronology of GI underground press

Asahi database

http://database.asahi.com/library2e/

Constructing Immigrants
A Historical Discourse Analysis of the Representations of Immigrants in US Social Work, 1882-1952
http://jsw.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/6/2/169

Valerie Jarrett's Life Lessons from NYTimes

http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/jarretts-life-lessons/?scp=1&sq=Ms.%20Jarrett&st=cse

1. To thine own self be true.
2. All leaders are passionate about their beliefs, even the ones you don’t like.
3. Trust your gut after you have listened, studied and learned from those with a diverse range of opinions.
4. You never know who is watching, so work as hard as you can regardless of the assignment.
5. Don’t stay in your comfort zone too long.
6. As my grandmother would say: put yourself in the path of lightning.
7. Be flexible because opportunities rarely knock at the most opportune moments.
8. Take time to be kind to everyone.
9. Focus on your priorities.
10. In order to lead, someone must follow.
11. Effective leadership depends on your ability to connect and motivate people, not on your title, position or power.
12. Set high standards for yourself and your team (lead by example).
13. Take the time to develop personal relationships all along the way, and really cultivate those upon whom you depend. In order for them to help you, they must know you. And you must know what will motivate them. Nurture them so they can help you lead. They must believe in not just your ideas, but you.
14. Good will matters.
15. Women are particularly good at listening and studying their audience.
16. Have the courage to make tough decisions.
17. When you lead, not everyone will follow, and that’s okay.
18. You will fail. Don’t take your failures or your success too seriously. Learn to laugh at yourself. Trust me. It helps.
19. Affiliate yourself with worthy institutions, lead by good people who share your core values.
20. You can have it all, just not at the same time, and in the proportions you may want.
21. To those who much is given, much is expected.

Korean Screen Quota: Views and Analyses

http://www.cine21.com/Article/article_view.php?mm=005001001&article_id=36791

2006년 1월 26일, 대한민국 정부는 스크린쿼터를 146일에서 절반인 73일로 줄인다고 공식 발표하였고, 이를 둘러싼 찬반 논란과 영화인들의 반대 시위가 이어지고 있다.
2006년 3월 7일, 이해찬 국무총리가 주재한 국무회의에서 스크린쿼터를 146일에서 73일로 줄이는 영화진흥법시행령 개정안을 통과시켰다. 통과된 개정안은 7월 1일부터 시행 중이며, 스크린쿼터문화연대를 중심으로 한 영화인들이 반발하고 있다.


http://breaknews.com/new/sub_read.html?uid=80341§ion=section37
□ 한미FTA는 돌아올 수 없는 강
한미FTA는 다른 FTA와 다른 큰 특징이 있다. 최악의 독소조항만을 모으면 △네거티브 리스트(negative list) △역진 금지(rachet) 장치 △미래의 최혜국(future MFN) △투자자-국가 소송제(ISD) 등이 있다.
'네거티브 리스트'는 시장개방의 원칙으로, 개방하지 않을 분야를 쓰는 것이다. 개방할 분야를 쓰는 방식에 비해 개방 폭이 훨씬 넓을 수밖에 없고, 새로 생기는 서비스분야는 무조건 개방된다. 새로운 서비스는 미국에서 압도적으로 많이 생기고, 무조건 개방이 되기 때문에 전부 미국기업이 독점하게 될 것이다.
개방 대상을 분류하는 기준으로 '현재유보'와 '미래유보'라는 개념이 있다. 간단히 정리하면 미래유보는 앞으로의 국내 상황의 변화에 따라 개방 폭 조정이 가능한 것이고, 현재유보는 조정이 불가능한 것이다.
김현종 본부장이 미국에서 한미FTA를 하자고 애걸을 하니까 미국이 내세운 4대 선결조건의 하나가 스크린쿼터 축소였다. 과거 146일이었던 한국영화 의무상영일수가 73일로 반토막났고, 영화인들은 한미FTA 협상과정에 스크린쿼터를 미래유보에 넣어달라고 요구했지만 결국 현재유보에 들어갔다.
여기에서 래칫(역진금지장치)이 문제가 된다. 래칫은 톱니바퀴의 역회전을 막기 위한 걸림쇠 장치를 말하는데, 개방 폭을 확대하는 것은 가능하지만 그것을 되돌리는 것은 불가능하다는 뜻이다.
현재유보에 들어간 스크린쿼터는 73일 이상으로 늘리는 것은 불가능하지만 만약 이명박 정부가 스크린쿼터를 50일로 줄여도, 다음정권에서 73일까지 되돌리는 것이 가능했을 것인데, 래칫 조항이 들어가면서 73일로도 늘릴 수가 없게 됐다. 만약 한나라당이 또 집권을 해서 20일로 줄이면 다시 그대로 고정이다. / 정태인

Web Sites That Dig for News Rise as Watchdogs

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/18/business/media/18voice.html?_r=1&hp
NYTimes Article published
By RICHARD PÉREZ-PEÑA
Published: November 17, 2008
A version of this article appeared in print on November 18, 2008, on page A1 of the New York edition

SAN DIEGO — Over the last two years, some of this city’s darkest secrets have been dragged into the light — city officials with conflicts of interest and hidden pay raises, affordable housing that was not affordable, misleading crime statistics.



Investigations ensued. The chiefs of two redevelopment agencies were forced out. One of them faces criminal charges. Yet the main revelations came not from any of San Diego’s television and radio stations or its dominant newspaper, The San Diego Union-Tribune, but from a handful of young journalists at a nonprofit Web site run out of a converted military base far from downtown’s glass towers — a site that did not exist four years ago.

As America’s newspapers shrink and shed staff, and broadcast news outlets sink in the ratings, a new kind of Web-based news operation has arisen in several cities, forcing the papers to follow the stories they uncover.

Here it is VoiceofSanDiego.org, offering a brand of serious, original reporting by professional journalists — the province of the traditional media, but at a much lower cost of doing business. Since it began in 2005, similar operations have cropped up in New Haven, the Twin Cities, Seattle, St. Louis and Chicago. More are on the way.

Their news coverage and hard-digging investigative reporting stand out in an Internet landscape long dominated by partisan commentary, gossip, vitriol and citizen journalism posted by unpaid amateurs.

The fledgling movement has reached a sufficient critical mass, its founders think, so they plan to form an association, angling for national advertising and foundation grants that they could not compete for singly. And hardly a week goes by without a call from journalists around the country seeking advice about starting their own online news outlets.

“Voice is doing really significant work, driving the agenda on redevelopment and some other areas, putting local politicians and businesses on the hot seat,” said Dean Nelson, director of the journalism program at Point Loma Nazarene University in San Diego. “I have them come into my classes, and I introduce them as, ‘This is the future of journalism.’ ”

That is a subject of hot debate among people who closely follow the newspaper industry. Publishing online means operating at half the cost of a comparable printed paper, but online advertising is not robust enough to sustain a newsroom.

And so financially, VoiceofSan Diego and its peers mimic public broadcasting, not newspapers. They are nonprofit corporations supported by foundations, wealthy donors, audience contributions and a little advertising.

New nonprofits without a specific geographic focus also have sprung up to fill other niches, like ProPublica, devoted to investigative journalism, and the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, which looks into problems around the world. A similar group, the Center for Investigative Reporting, dates back three decades.

But some experts question whether a large part of the news business can survive on what is essentially charity, and whether it is wise to lean too heavily on the whims of a few moneyed benefactors.

“These are some of the big questions about the future of the business,” said Robert H. Giles, curator of the Nieman Foundation for Journalism at Harvard. Nonprofit news online “has to be explored and experimented with, but it has to overcome the hurdle of proving it can support a big news staff. Even the most well-funded of these sites are a far cry in resources from a city newspaper.”

The people who run the local news sites see themselves as one future among many, and they have a complex relationship with traditional media. The say that the deterioration of those media has created an opening for new sources of news, as well as a surplus of unemployed journalists for them to hire.

“No one here welcomes the decline of newspapers,” said Andrew Donohue, one of two executive editors at VoiceofSanDiego. “We can’t be the main news source for this city, not for the foreseeable future. We only have 11 people.”

(Page 2 of 2)

Those people are almost all young, some of them refugees from older media. The executive editors, Mr. Donohue, 30, and Scott Lewis, 32, each had a few years of experience at small papers before abandoning newsprint. So far, their audience is tiny, about 18,000 monthly unique visitors, according to Quantcast, a media measurement service.

The biggest of the new nonprofit news sites, MinnPost in the Twin Cities and the St. Louis Beacon, can top 200,000 visitors in a month, but even that is a fraction of the Internet readership for the local newspapers.

VoiceofSanDiego’s site looks much like any newspaper’s, frequently updated with breaking news and organized around broad topics: government and politics, housing, economics, the environment, schools and science. It has few graphics, but plenty of photography and, through a partnership with a local TV station, some video.

But it is, of necessity, thin — strictly local, selective in what it covers and with none of the wire service articles that plump up most news sites.

VoiceofSanDiego grew out of a string of spectacular municipal scandals. City councilmen took bribes from a strip club owner, a mishandled pension fund drove the city to the brink of bankruptcy and city officials illegally covered up the crisis, to name a few.

A semiretired local businessman, Buzz Woolley, watched the parade of revelations, fraud charges and criminal convictions, seething with frustration. He was particularly incensed that the pension debacle had developed over several years, more or less in plain sight, but had received little news coverage.

“I kept thinking, ‘Who’s paying attention?’ ” Mr. Woolley recalled. “Why don’t we hear about this stuff before it becomes a disaster?’ ”

In 2004, his conversations with a veteran columnist, Neil Morgan, who had been fired by The Union-Tribune, led to the creation of VoiceofSanDiego, with Mr. Woolley as president, chief executive and, at first, chief financial backer.

Most of this new breed of news sites have a whiff of scruffy insurgency, but MinnPost, based in Minneapolis, resembles the middle-age establishment. Its founder and chief executive, Joel Kramer, has been the editor and publisher of The Star Tribune, of Minneapolis, and its top editors are refugees from that paper or its rival, The Pioneer Press in St. Paul.

MinnPost is rich compared with its peers — with a $1.5 million bankroll from Mr. Kramer and several others when it started last year, and a $1.3 million annual budget — and it has been more aggressive about selling ads and getting readers to donate.

The full-time editors and reporters earn $50,000 to $60,000 a year, Mr. Kramer said — a living wage, but less than they would make at the competing papers. MinnPost has just five full-time employees, but it uses more than 40 paid freelance contributors, allowing it to do frequent reporting on areas like the arts and sports.

If MinnPost is the establishment, The New Haven Independent is a guerrilla team. It has no office, and holds its meetings in a coffee shop. The founder and editor, Paul Bass, who spent most of his career at an alternative weekly, works from home or, occasionally, borrows a desk at a local Spanish-language newspaper.

In addition to state and city affairs, The Independent covers small-bore local news, lately doing a series of articles on people who face the loss of their homes to foreclosure.

With a budget of just $200,000, it has a small staff — some are paid less than $30,000 — and a small corps of freelancers and volunteer contributors. It does not sell ads, which Mr. Bass says would be impractical.

“There’s room for a whole range of approaches, and we’re living proof that you can do meaningful journalism very cheaply,” Mr. Bass said.

Crosscut.com, a local news site in Seattle, does reporting and commentary of its own, but also aggregates articles from other news sources. It began last year as a business, but is changing to nonprofit status.

VoiceofSanDiego took yet another approach, hiring a crew of young, hungry, full-time journalists, paying them salaries comparable to what they would make at large newspapers and relying less on freelancers. Mr. Donohue and Mr. Lewis earned $60,000 to $70,000 last year, according to the VoiceofSan Diego I.R.S. filings.

On a budget under $800,000 this year — almost $200,000 more than last year — everyone does double duty. Mr. Lewis writes a political column, and Mr. Donohue works on investigative articles. But the operation is growing and Mr. Woolley says he has become convinced that the nonprofit model has the best chance of survival.

“Information is now a public service as much as it’s a commodity,” he said. “It should be thought of the same way as education, health care. It’s one of the things you need to operate a civil society, and the market isn’t doing it very well.”

Translator's introduction to "Gramophone, Film, Typewriter"

Eric Havlock - whose work on the Hellenic shift from orality to early literacy had become required reading for media and communication historians...

In 1962-63, five prominent text shedding lights on the role of oral communication appeared within twelve months.

News Articles related to Choi, Jinsil

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/03/world/asia/03actress.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=choi%20jin-sil&st=cse&oref=slogin
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/technology/internet/13suicide.html?scp=3&sq=choi%20jin-sil&st=cse

Order of Discourse

Text drawn from N. Fairclough's "The dialectics of discourse Textus" XIV.2 2001a, pages 231-242

Social practices networked in a particular way constitute a social order – for instance, the emergent neo-liberal global order referred to above, or at more local level, the social order of education in a particular society at a particular time. The discourse/semiotic aspect of a social order is what we can call an order of discourse. It is the way in which diverse genres and discourses and styles are networked together. An order of discourse is a social structuring of semiotic difference – a particular social ordering of relationships amongst different ways of making meaning, ie different discourse and genres and styles. One aspect of this ordering is dominance: some ways of making meaning are dominant or mainstream in a particular order of discourse, others are marginal, or oppositional, or ‘alternative’. For instance, there may be a dominant way to conduct a doctor-patient consultation in Britain, but there are also various other ways, which may be adopted or developed to a greater or lesser extent in opposition to the dominant way. The dominant way probably still maintains social distance between doctors and patients, and the authority of the doctor over the way interaction proceeds; but there are others ways which are more ‘democratic’, in which doctors play down their authority. The political concept of ‘hegemony’ can usefully be used in analyzing orders of discourse (Fairclough 1992, Laclau & Mouffe 1985) – a particular social structuring of semiotic difference may become hegemonic, become part of the legitimizing common sense which sustains relations of domination, but hegemony will always be contested to a greater or lesser extent, in hegemonic struggle. An order of discourse is not a closed or rigid system, but rather an open system, which is put at risk by what happens in actual interactions.

PAPER IDEA; Politics of memory in media representation of political debate

The Presidential Commission for Truth and Reconciliation
The Presidential Commission for Undocumented Deaths

Hohendahl- Recasting Public Sphere

Habermas's theory of the public sphere responds rather directly to Koselleck's theory of the modern state, which he received from Carl Schmitt. Koselleck set out to demonstrate that the modern absolutist state, as it emerged during the religious wars of the sixteenth and seven- teenth centuries, constituted itself by denying any competing political authority and by depoliticizing its subjects. Moral and political decisions were clearly separated by removing morality from the political sphere. Only through this separation could the state guarantee the stability of the political order. For Koselleck, the project of the Enlightenment, on the other hand, consisted of an attempt by intellectuals (philosophers and critics) to undermine the authority of the state not so much through actions as through public discussion. The public sphere of the eighteenth century is the locus where, according to Koselleck, the moral criticism of private citizens challenges the authority of the state as sovereign decision maker. This criticism, although claimed to be strictly moral, has major political implications, namely the destruction of the state through a political revolution. In Koselleck's narrative, modern postrevolutionary societies have lost their secure foundations. Hence they are prone to chaotic upheavals caused by subjects who are no longer controlled by the proper authority of the state. From this perspective, democracy is a symptom of decline rather than the achievement of free and politically mature citizens. By the same token, Koselleck would interpret modern fascism as a consequence of democracy, not its principal opponent.

Unmistakably, Habermas's theory of the public sphere reworks Koselleck's narrative, using most of its building blocks: the concept of the absolutist state, the idea of moral criticism as the primary weapon against the state, the dichotomy of private and public, and the understanding of the Enlightenment project as a fundamental critique of authoritarian structures. Habermas, however, coming from the Hegelian-Marxist tradition of the Frankfurt School, reversed the trajectory of the narrative. Where Koselleck perceived decline (already during the eighteenth century), Habermas saw the beginning of modernity, containing the very project that was supposed to shape postwar Germany. This project he defined as the development of a postauthoritarian civil society, based on democratic political institutions. More specifically, he focused on the emergence of the public sphere in the eighteenth century and its subsequent transformation during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in order to offer a historically grounded analysis of the viability and the limitations of democracy after World War II.

Essentially, Habermas links the decline of the public sphere to a new entwinement of state and society during the late nineteenth century. While the state increasingly takes over social functions, social organizations, which are by nature private, tend to participate in the political process. As a result, political decisions, which are supposed to be prepared in the public sphere, turn into a bargaining process between social organizations (Verbinde) and administrative organizations. These arrangements result in a depoliticization of the public sphere. When administrative and representative organizations such as Berufsverbdnde (professional organizations) closely cooperate in the legislative process, the political participation of the citizens is reduced to a few formal acts. The public sphere as a space for critical debate and a locus for political opposition, as Habermas argues, has been emptied of its former substance. Public opinion, the classic control mechanism of early liberal theory, is no longer the result of rational debate but the product of publicity. "Publicity work is aimed at strengthening the prestige of one's own position without making the matter on which a compromise is to be achieved itself a topic of the public discussion. Organizations and functionaries display representation."14 In short, public opin- ion is largely manipulated for the purpose of working out compromises between state and society.

The incident in Hoyerswerda, where right-wing youths attacked and burned a building in which foreigners were temporarily housed, demonstrated in no uncertain terms that for a segment of the German population physical violence has replaced the willingness to enter public debate.

While Habermas's theory of the public sphere had no room for a multicultural society, it did discuss, as we have seen, the transformation of the bourgeois public sphere under the conditions of the social welfare state. Habermas's contribution is particularly remarkable because it was formulated before the serious economic crises of the seventies and eighties.

The social crises of the seventies and early eighties resulted in the marginalization of the unemployed, the old, and the handicapped. To these groups we have to add millions of foreign workers and political refugees who for the most part were not German citizens and therefore, especially during a period of crisis, not accepted as social equals.

Caigentan, Vegetable Roots Discourse 菜根譚 채근담

No. 56
Those who study without appreciating sagely wisdom are mere scribes. Those who serve in office and have no affection for the people are thieves in courtly garb. Those who teach and do not act upon their teachings are merely mouthing Chan (Zen). Those who build careers without thinking of planting seeds of virtue are but flowery flourishes.

No. 69
People with hot blazing tempers set fire to everything. Unsociable people with icy tempers invariably destroy everything. Stiff obstinate people are like stagnant water or decayed trees. With their vital faculties diminished in such ways, it is difficult to speak with such people about building achievements for widespread welfare.

No. 82
When the wind passed through a grove of bamboo, the rattle of the stalks dies away. After the wild geese are gone their reflection in the deep pool disappears. In such a way, things come up for you as a noble person, and when they are gone your mind is empty once again.

No. 106
As a noble person I am bot flighty in manner. Otherwise I will easily be moved by circumstances, and that's bot conducive to calm and settled judgments. At the same time, I am not too unyielding in my judgments, or my vitality would be disabled and my performance muddied.

Caigentan by Hong Zicheng
translated by Robert Aitken
Vegetable Roots Discourse: Wisdom from Ming China on Life and Living

Hwang Byung-gy's Inteview with Chosun Ilbo

Diana & J

The ceremony of Coronation fulfills the same social functions as more strictly religious rituals, that is the values of the community are celebrated and affirmed.

collective sentiment
collective ritual

subliminally understood notion of the monarchy

Coronation was one of those periodic occasions which provided for an affirmation of commonly held national values.

We know that the premature death of film-stars and pop-idols - James Dean, Marilyn Monroe, Buddy Holly - leads to demonstrations of public grief, but the scale of the grief is in no way comparable to what we witnessed after Diana's death and is confined to limited sections of the public (p. 5)

Diana, however, belongs to a very different category; she is very much real and authentic.

individual articulations of a national sentiment and not simply as private emotions

Who killed "The Nation's Actress"?: Don't worry! She will be replaced with a new princess


J did not have royal status as Diana did.
No one felt divine emotional collectiveness at the degree Diana's death caused people to feel
She remained a pop star, was not promoted to the princess status
However, she was commemorated but will sure be forgotten easily, because another fake princess will replace her spot.
Diana was not replaceable, but J was.
Why?
What lacks in J. She lacks authenticity. She was made by media as opposed to the fact that Diana's authenticity was made by collective acknowledgement and rituals.
as a victim of information consumerism, commercialism, and unethical journalism.


The public was insisting it had not been deceived. Apart from anything else this was important for its collective self-respect: if it had been deceived then the public endorsement of the marriage was a charade. The case for Diana's royal sacredness had therefore to pushed as vigorously as possible (p. 5).

Motherhood of the two princes.

She (Diana) is the 'People's' as opposed to the Palace's Princess.

from
royal = sacred = moral values of the community
to
royal = sacred = died for our [nation's] sins

Thus in death she was able to accomplish what Bailey has called the 'supreme trick of identification in which the mass see [the leader] not only as an ideal above them but simultaneously as one of them. Through her royal personhood she incorporated human failures, royal hopes and divine aspirations (p. 7).

By praising those qualities in Diana, we indirectly praise them in ourselves: our very recognition that these are the important things in life raises our own moral status, and provides us with the strength and self-confidence to begin a new life, as Diana begins a new life, in those icons of innocence, her two sons.

...so the death of secular social martyrs can be regarded as the seed for the regeneration of the nation (p. 7)

Watson, C. W. (1997) Born a lady, became a princess, died a saint.

Traumatic Nationalism

People's princess in comparison with Diana

Rumor
The Psychology of Rumor by Gordon Willard Allport (Author), Leo Postman (Author)

Degradation Rituals

Celebrities are expected to embody virtues
They are magnifiers

Mark Crispin Miller; Boxed In: The Culture of TV
talks about media concentration; Barbara Walters

Degradation Rituals (Goffman, 1963; Garfinkel, 1967)
Celebrities have to go through degradation process?


Richard Sennett (Saskia Sassen); The fall of public man 1970s

Mark Andrejevic

Rite, Drama, Festival, Spectacle: Rehearsals Toward a Theory of Cultural Performance Edited by John J. MacAloon

Sign: icon, index, symbol

People who study signs and communication differentiate three kinds of signs: an ICON from an INDEX from a SYMBOL. This distinction is very important and derives from philosopher C. S. Peirce in the late 19th century. This page is an attempt to sharpen the difference between these three which are described in your text (CELL, pp. 1-4). The critical issue is to appreciate what a symbol is. This is the key to understanding language and how it differs from any animal communication systems.

First, we must note that a sign is a stimulus pattern that has a meaning. The difference between the various kinds of sign has to do with how the meaning happens to be attached to (or associated with) the pattern.

ICON

The icon is the simplest since it is a pattern that physically resembles what it `stands for'.

A picture of your face is an icon of you.
The little square with a picture of a printer on your computer screen is an icon for the print function. (Whereas a little box that has the word `PRINT' is not an icon since it has no physical resemblance to printing or the printer.)
The picture of a smoking cigarette with a diagonal bar across the picture is an icon that directly represents `Smoking? Don't do it' (at least it does with appropriate cultural experience).
Your cat is preparing to jump up on your lap, so you put out the palm of your hand over the cat to prevent him from jumping. The first time, you may physically impede his jump (This is not a sign at all), but after a couple times, just putting your palm out briefly becomes an iconic sign for `You aren't welcome on my lap right now.' The gesture is an icon because it physically resembles an act of preventing him from jumping, even though it would not prevent him if he really wanted to do it.
Words can be partly iconic too. Bow-wow, splash and hiccup resemble the sounds they represent- at least a little. And the bird called the whippoorwill produces a call resembling this English phrase, so whippoorwill is an iconic word. (These are also called onomotopoetic words.)
Also words can be pronounced in an iconic way: His nose grew wa-a-a-ay out to here. Julia Childes grabbed that carrot and went CHOP CHOP CHOP CHOP. Aw, poor widdow ba-by!
Of course sometimes there could be a dispute about what `physical resemblance' means and how similar it must be. And just because we humans can recognize a little picture of something doesn't mean that any other animal could. (Do you think your cat could recognize a picture of a can of catfood and interpret it as ``Time to eat''? Not likely.) So physical resemblance is by no means a simple concept. But how and why an image or a sound has some particular semantic content for us humans is fairly easy to understand.

INDEX

An `index' is defined by some sensory feature, A, (something directly visible, audible, smellable, etc) that correlates with and thus implies or `points to' B, something of interest to an animal. All animals exploit various kinds of indexical signs in dealing with the world. The more intelligent animals are good at learning and exploiting more sophisticated indices (thus a cat will use and learn many more indexical signs than a frog, a fish or an ant -- which tend to be restricted to ones acquired innately).

Thus,

dark clouds in the west are an index of impending rain (at least in Indiana),
for a fish in the sea, the direction of greater light is the direction of warmer water,
a limping gait is a sign that an animal is physically impaired,
a scowling facial expression is an index of the person's displeasure or concern (to a human),
sensing a pheremone in the air is an indexical sign (for some insects) that a sexually receptive member of its own species is located upwind,
a particular alarm call in certain monkeys is a sign that the animal has either directly sensed (eg, seen, smelled, heard) a particular type of predator OR has heard another monkey give this predator alarm call.
a particular pronunciation of a word is a index that someone comes from a particular geographic place or social group.
Note that all of these above depend on a certain statistical regularity of part A (the signal pattern) with part B (the behaviorally relevant state). The exploitation of this regularity requires first, detecting property A (which is not necessarily simple) and either learning (or innately knowing) its correlation with the B. In that case the animal will use A as an index for B.

Note that for humans, some indices can be artificial and manmade (rather than environmentally natural or innate to particular species):

a beep from your oven can signal that the cookies are ready to be removed,
a red stoplight is a sign that you should stop your car if you don't want to risk an accident,
in an animal behavior experiment, a flashing light could be a sign that food will be available in a certain place or that a shock will soon follow.
a person can wave their hand as a sign of recognition and greeting (though this may be partly iconic too).
Notice that the correlation need not be perfect. It isn't always warmer closer to the sea surface, dark clouds in the west don't always mean the rain is coming this way, and even a stoplight can be broken sometimes. This doesn't detract from the usefulness of these signs as a way for an animal to guide its life in a confusing and only partly predictable world.

Words are said to be indexical when they directly point to their meaning - without depending on any relationship to other words. Thus, words like here, there, I, me, you, this, etc. For all of these there is an implied pointing gesture. (Remember in Latin, index really meant the index finger.)

SYMBOL

Words as Symbols.

Now, what about a noun word in a human language? Let's say English `KITTY'? Isn't this just a kind of arbitrary index? Isn't KITTY just an index for the presence of a cat (just for English speakers of course)? In support, one might note that a small child and its mother would be likely to say KITTY in the presence of a cat (so there should be some correlation between the cat and the word KITTY). The sounds [kIDi] correlate partially with the presence of cat (so A predicts B). Doesn't that show that this is just an indexical sign like those above? Unfortunately no - even if its true that most early words for children are learned indexically (that is, by pointing to what they refer to). In general, however, it is very rare for the utterance of a word to correlate with the thing it refers to. Sometimes such a correlation exists, of course, buta word in any language is vastly more complex and sophisticated even for language-learning infants. Notice that:

You and your baby will also freely use the word KITTY when a cat is NOT around (so the correlation between KITTY and the cat is a very weak). [If your dog knows the `word' TAKE-A-WALK, try just discussing taking a walk in earshot of the dog and see what happens! Dogs have no grasp of `Talking about taking-a-walk'. That's because take-a-walk is only an indexical sign for your dog, not a symbol as it is for you and your baby.]
Many words in every language describe objects that noone has ever seen, like MONSTER, UNICORN, GHOST, DEVIL, etc. (so the possibility of a ny correlation is ruled out completely)! What percent of the time that you utter the word ROCKET or TRAIN, do you suppose there is a physical rocket or train present? My guess is 0% for ROCKET and about 1-3% train. If there is no correlation or an extremely weak one, then these words cannot be indices.
On the other hand, any word has strong associations with other words that are `activated' whenever a word is heard or read. Thus KITTY activates words like CAT, FUR, BABY, PURR, PUPPY, PLAY, SAUCER, MILK, YARNBALL, CATFOOD, etc.
By `activate', I mean that you are more likely to think of or utter these other words after hearing or saying KITTY. (There are many kinds of experimental evidence for this, plus intuition.) This suggests that KITTY may be somehow physically linked to these other words in the brain. It suggests that KITTY gets some of its meaning from the selective activation of just these particular words (and their associated emotional content) when the word KITTY is spoken.
Furthermore, many word meanings have associates that are component parts which are also words. Thus a KITTY has FEET, PAWS, WHISKERS, EARS, CLAWS, TONGUE, TEETH, TAIL, etc. A TREE has BRANCH, LEAF, PINECONE, FLOWER, ACORN, BARK, BIRDNEST, etc.
Many words are situated in a hierarchy of superordinate category words (that is, larger, inclusive categories) like CAT, PET, MAMMAL, ANIMAL, FELINE, FAMILY MEMBER, etc.
Many words have a hierarchy of subordinate category subtype words: MY KITTY, YOUR KITTY, STRIPED KITTY, TABBY, etc.
These word-word relationships (sometimes called word-associates) are critical for anchoring the meaning of a word without requiring any correlation in space and time between the signal (the sound of the word) and its meaning. Indices do not require any such set of relationships to work as signs. In summary, symbols like most words in a human language are (a) easily removable from their context, and (b) are closely associated with large sets of other words.

Notice that humans easily learn words for things we have never experienced. Children who grow up in the tropics learn to correctly use words like SNOW and ICE without ever seeing snow or ice. It is not a big problem for them because they have heard descriptions of them in terms of words they do know, like COLD, WHITE, CLEAR, HARD, SOFT, FLUFFY, WATER, MELT, FALLING, SLIPPERY, etc. From these descriptions, they get a pretty good idea what snow and ice are like - enough to read and produce the words appropriately.

This is the enormous power of human symbols: When you have learned a basic vocabulary (based in part on indexical relationships), you can use it to bootstrap to many other new concepts and words. And given the possibility of cultural transmission from generation to generation, human knowledge and understanding become cumulative and have grown at a very rapid rate (relative to the creation and transmission of innate knowledge).

IMPORTANT CLAIM:

Apparently no living nonhuman animals are able to use word-like symbols.

There are, however, some (disputed) claims that a few individual animals (mostly higher primates like monkeys, chimpanzees and gorillas) have been trained by humans to use a small (< 50) inventory of symbol-like units using hand signs or small physical tokens. If this claim is true, it implies a huge divide between humans and nonhuman animals. It means that no animal communication systems can be understood as just `simple versions of human languages'. This claim is daring and provocative, but probably true. [Of course, if one believes that humans are derived from nonhuman animals, then somehow our ancestors must have passed through stages that were intermediate between index-based communication systems (like dogs, monkeys, bees, whales, etc) and modern-human symbolic language even though we have very little direct evidence about how this evolution took place.]

Nonword Symbols.

Words (especially nouns, verbs and adjectives) are the architype for symbols. But the most common use of the term symbol in everyday, nontechnical language is for signs that are not words: eg, a flag or totem animal as the symbol of a country (bald eagle for USA, bear for Russia, etc), a cross for Christianity, star of David for Judaism, swastika for Nazism, a particular type font for a specific product (eg, Coca-Cola, Indiana University, etc).

It seems that a similar set of associations to other words exist for such symbols. Thus, the US FLAG (that is, the graphic pattern in red, white and blue, not the English word FLAG) gets its meaning partly from its association to words and concepts like: HOMELAND, WASHINGTON, BALD EAGLE, PATRIOTISM, MOM, DAD, APPLE PIE, PRIDE, HEROISM, DEMOCRACY, `OH SAY CAN YOU SEE...', `I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE...', SACRIFICE, etc etc.

Mathematical and logical symbols also get their meaning from their relation to other symbols. Thus pi is defined as the ratio of the circumference of a circle to its diameter: pi = c/d.

So, nonword symbols are much like words but often lack a phonetic form.

Conclusion.

The term sign is often used for all three of these: icons, indices and symbols. All have a signal aspect, some physical pattern (eg, a sound or visible shape) and a meaning (some semantic content that is implied or `brought to mind') by the signal. But they differ in that icons have a physical resemblance between the signal and the meaning and an index has a correlation in space and time with its meaning. But a symbol is an arbitrary pattern (usually a sound pattern in a language) that gets its meaning primarily from its mental association with other symbols and only secondarily from its correlation with environmentally relevant properties.

Contents drawn from http://www.cs.indiana.edu/~port/teach/103/sign.symbol.html

Research Funding Resources

T Anne Cleary International Research Fund

http://www.grad.uiowa.edu/students/FinancialSupport/Fellowships/TAnneCleary.asp

The deadline for applications is Friday, March 28, 2008. To apply, please consult the application guidelines and complete the application form and reference form.


UISG Executive Council of Graduate and Professional Students
http://www.uiowa.edu/~ecgps/
2008-2009 Scholarly Presentation Award Deadlines:
September 18, 2008
November 13, 2008
February 5, 2009
April 2, 2009

2008-2009 Research Grant Deadlines:
October 10th, 2008
March 6th, 2009


GSS (Graduate Student Senate) Travel Funds

GSS provides travel funding assistance to graduate students who present their research at conferences, meeting, symposia and similar professional or academic gatherigs. The funds are provided by the Graduate College and they are allocated by the Travel Funds Committee to deserving applications at multiple deadlines throughout each fiscal year. GSS Travel Funds are awarded for travel to both domestic and international conferences.

The GSS Travel Funds deadlines for the 2009 fiscal year are:

September 18, 2008
November 13, 2008
February 5, 2009
April 2, 2009
May 21, 2009
July 9, 2009

GSS Travel Funds will soon be submitted and processed strictly electronically. We don't believe we will have that system up and running until the November 13th deadline. For now, follow the links on the left to the PDF application that will be used for the September 18th deadline.

UI International Program Funding Resources
* Stanley Graduate Award for International Research application due Feb. 25
* International Travel Fund DEADLINES: October 15, 2008; February 11th, 2009; April 8, 2009

http://international.uiowa.edu/grants/students/funding/graduate/default.asp


Kirkwood College
http://www.kirkwood.edu/site/index.php?p=3961

The Japan Foundation Center for Global Partnership
Mission
To promote collaboration between Japan and the United States with the goal of fulfilling shared global responsibilities and contributing to improvements in the world's welfare.
To enhance dialogue and interchange between Japanese and US citizens on a wide range of issues, thereby improving bilateral relations.
http://www.cgp.org/index.php?option=article&task=default&articleid=354

Program Challenge Fund: CPB (Corporation for Public Broadcasting) Grants for TV program proposals
http://www.cpb.org/grants/opengrantsdisplay.html?category=TV

Henry Luce Foundation for Asian Studies
http://www.hluce.org/asiarespongrant.aspx

Name is a rhetoric device

Name is a rhetoric device.
Name is not simple.
Girl's names are more volatile.
Then, why?
I don't know but many, or some, answers are possible.
Males are expected to carry family tradition, last name, etc. That way people are more conservative to boy's name than they are to girl's name.
Is there gender discrimination going on here? It is fair to say Yes.
How?
We will see what he says in the next week. It is certainly a very interesting topic anyway.

John Peters on name as symbol in one of his class of Core Concepts of Communication

http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/babynames

Media Discourse - Fairclough

Approaches to media discourse

In fact there is a great deal of cross-fertilization between them following (p. 20).

1. Linguistic and sociolinguistic analysis
2. conversation analysis
3. semiotic analysis: ideologically potent categories and classifications which are implicit in news texts.
4. critical linguistics and social semiotics
5. social-cognitive analysis: van Dijk

Van Dijk's main motivation for linking media texts to context is to show in detail how social relationships and processes (e.g. the reproduction of racism) are accomplished at a micro-level through routine practices, whereas my major concern is to show how shifting language and discursive practices in the media constitute social and cultural change.
This is a powerful integrated framework for news discourse analysis. Nevertheless, for my purposes it has a number of limitations. First, the focus is on representations; social relations and identities in news discourse - and the interpersonal functions of language - receive little attention. Second, texts are analyzed linguistically but not intertextually, in terms of their constitution through configurations of discourses and genres. A central feature of my approach is the claim that linguistic analysis needs to be complemented by intertextual analysis. A third and related point is that van Dijk's work gives a one-sided emphasis to news-making practices as stable structures which contribute to the reproduction of relations of dominations and racist ideologies, which backgrounds the diversity and heterogeneity of practices (p. 30).

6. cultural-generic analysis: Raymond Williams, the most close to the intertextual analysis Fairclough is aiming to.

Intertextual analysis focuses on the borderline between text and discourse practice in the analytical framework. Intertextual analysis is looking at text from the perspective of discourse practice, looking at the traces of the discourse practice in the text. Intertextual analysis aims to unravel the various genres and discourses - often, in creative discourse practice, a highly complex mixture (p. 61).

Linguistic analysis is descriptive in nature, whereas intertextual analysis is more interpretive. Linguistic features of texts provide evidence which can be used in intertextual analysis, and intertextual analysis is a particular sort of interpretation of that evidence (p. 61).

Orders of Discourse
For instance, advertising amy be rooted in the orders of discourse of commodity production, distribution, and consumption, but it has come to be an element in the orders of discourse of diverse institutions - education, medicine, the arts, and so forth..
It follows that discourse analysis should always attend to relationships, interactions and complicities between social institutions/domains and their orders of discourse, and be sensitive to similarities in social organization and discursive practices between different institutions (p. 63).

Media and Discourse - Fairclough

New trend in media studies: intertextuality, genre mixing, identity

Fairclough wants to reject to arid formalism of past approaches in terms of using language as the space of analysis.

linguistic and discoursal nature of media power

Representations, Identities, and Relations

Three questions asked in discourse analysis
1. How is the world (events, relationships, etc) represented?'
2. What identities are set up for those involved in the programme or story (reporters, audiences, 'third parties' referred to or interviewed)?
3. What relationships are set up between those involved (e.g. reporter-audience, expert-audience or politician-audience relationship)?

Media operates in a social system, thus question power is inevitable.

Conversationalization + marketizatoin (commercialization) -> normalization & naturalization
in other words, conversationalized discourse is a strategy on the part of those with power to more effectively recruit people as audience and manipulate them socially and politically (p. 13).

Ideology = meaning in the service of power (Thompson).

I see presuppositions as 'preconstructed' elements within a text, elements that are constructed beforehand and elsewhere.

Exploring whether a particular implicit propositions or a set of propositions are working ideologically is one issue within a general set of questions that can be asked whenever one representation is selected over other available ones,or whenever identities or relations are constructed in one way rather than another. The questions are
(a) What are the social origins of this option?
(b) What motivations are there for making this choice?
(c) What is the effect of this choice, including its effects (positive or negative) upon the various interests of those involved?

Need to see language analysis as one of a range of types of analysis which need to be applied together to the mass media... (p. 15)

But reception studies sometimes lead to a disregard for the text itself, which I do not accept (p. 16).

A rather arid, formalist analysis of language, in abstraction from social context, still tend to dominate many departments of linguistics. That sort of approach cannot be the basis for effective interdisciplinary work on the media. My view is that we need to analyze media language as discourse and the linguistics analysis of media should be part of the discourse analysis of media. Linguistic analysis focuses on texts, in a broader sense: a newspaper article is a text, but so too is transcription of a radio or television programme. But discourse analysis is concerned with practices as well as texts, and with both discourse practices and sociocultural practices. By discourse practices I mean, for instance, the ways in which texts are produced by media workers in media institutions, and the ways in which texts are received by audiences (readers, listeners, viewers), as well as how media texts are socially distributed. There are various levels of sociocultural practice that may constitute parts of the context of discourse practice. I find it helpful to distinguish the 'situational,'institutional,' and 'societal' levels - the specific social goings-on that the discourse is part of, the institutional framework(s) that the discourse occurs within, and the wider societal matrix of the discourse (p. 16).

What is Text?
1. both written and spoken language
2. social semiotics including visual images and sound effects as parts of texts
3. multifunctional view of texts: ideational, interpersonal, and textual functions of language

therefore it is fair to say that representations, relations, and identities are always simultaneously at issue in a text

The wider social impact of media is not just to do with how they selectively represent the world, though that is a vitally important issue; it is also to do with what sorts of social identities, what versions of 'self', they project and what cultural values (be it consumerism, individualism or a cult of personality) these entail (p. 17).

Text as sets of Option: Choices of Meaning

What is Discourse?
In Linguistics: discourse as social action and interaction, people interacting together in real social situations.
In Post-structuralist social theory: a discourse as a social construction of reality, a form of knowledge

In the discourse perspective on media language which I have sketched out above, the analysis of texts I have sketched out above, the analysis of texts is not treated in isolation from the analysis of discourse practices and sociocultural practices.

Doodling while reading

culture is multiple, various, and varietal. – carey
participation observation, qualitative method, open-ended interviewing

media rituals, ceremonial television, disaster marathon.

rothenbular
Whatever well- applied method produces useful answers is fine


coman
Archetypical model, functionalist model, cognitive model

A space of symbolic bricolage

hanitzsch
three essential constituents
(Institutional Roles, Epistemologies and Ethical Ideologies),

Interventionism, Power Distance, Market Orientation, Objectivism, Empiricism, Relativism
and Idealism.

Pierre Bourdieu and using ethnographic material

The Objectivity Norm in American Journalism - Schudson

two having to do with the self-conscious pursuit of internal
group solidarity; and two having to do with the need to articulate the ideals of social practice in a group in order to exercise control over subordinates and to pass on group culture to the next generation.

The objectivity norm guides journalists to separate facts from values and to report only the facts. Objective reporting is supposed to be cool, rather than emotional, in tone. Objective reporting takes pains to represent fairly each leading side in a political controversy. According to the objectivity norm, the journalist’s job consists of reporting something called ‘news’ without commenting on it, slanting it, or shaping its formulation in any way. The value of objectivity is upheld specifically against partisan journalism in which newspapers are the declared allies or agents of political parties and their reporting of news is an element of partisan struggle. Partisan journalists, like objective journalists, typically reject inaccuracy, lying and misinformation, but partisan
journalists do not hesitate to present information from the perspective of a particular party or faction.

ritual solidarity
cultural contact and conflict can provoke the articulation of norms inside the group

Berkowitz & Eko plus journalism memo

Berkowitz & Eko: Blasphemy
Ritual; sacred rite
When application of a journalistic paradigm appears faulty, journalists work to assert the boundaries of acceptable practice.
Paradigm repair becomes a way of sustaining an intellectual position about authority of knowledge and freedom of speech.
Paradigm maintenance


Selecting News: The individual gatekeeper
Organizational News: News as a workplace product
Professionalizing News: News as journalists’ Norms and Routines
Selling News: News as economic entity
Telling News: News as Familiar Story
Ideology of News: News as social power


Introduction

Shudson
Political economy: fundings and constraints in news production
Sociological: working arrangements in production and occupational beliefs
Culturological: news emerges from the relationship between occurrences and culture’s symbolic system
News items are not simply selected but constructed


Zelizer: cultural contexts of journalism
Beyond these: News texts, news-gathering settings, and news audiences

Journalism as performance – that places emphasis on journalists’ roles as actors in unfolding of news occurrences

Journalism as narrative – sees a commonality among journalists within the news stories that they tell, repeat, and alter to construct the world they observe

Journalism as ritual - how culture are restated and placed into action

Journalism as interpretive community – journalists are united by the interpretations of reality that they share in their work


Individual and small group

Media organizations – news become the outcome of bureaucratic activity where journalists learn work routines and strategies for meeting organizational expectations and constraints

Industrial and institutional – economic necessities of a media organization in its particular socioeconomic system

Individual level: journalists’ predispositions and personal characteristics

Normative Journalistic Ethics code

Carey on Public Journalism

Naked Market Model
trustee journalism (1890 - 1968)- Shudson
Public journalism represents an attempt to be honest about the role of journalists in contemporary life, to bring journalists into the "conversation of the culture," to align the ideology of journalists with the role they actually play among us.

Without journalism there in so democracy, but without democracy there is no journalism either (p. 51).

There was a downside to modern journalism, however. Ultimately the public became a passive observer in the theater state of politics.

Following Watergate, the public and the political system became progressively ideologized and privatized, though that would not be apparent until the presidency of Ronald Reagan (p. 59).

cooperation of journalism by power = refedalization (p. 59).

In that campaign there was, as if by mutual agreement of the press and the candidates, no discussion or debate of an of the issues facing the nation.

It asserts that citizenship is more than rights and interests but also a matter of identity (p. 61).

Republican government must espouse and support certain values, namely, the good, in republican government itself (p. 61).

And such a press must, therefore, support not only journalism but other civic institutions that cultivate the virtues of public engagement and a broader concern for the common life.

In the late 1930s, Harvard economist Joseph Schumpeter, a great lover of capitalism, wrote that he feared for capitalism's future because of what he called its process of creative destruction. Capitalism was such an innovative economic system, he thought, that it tended to destroy all things including itself. It did so by eating its own seed corn, by destroying the social and political bases that guarantees it (p. 65).

Carey, J. (1999). In defense of public journalism. In T. L. Glasser (Ed.), The idea of public journalism (pp. 49-66). New York; London : Guilford Press.

Objectivity - Mindich

from Introduction

For more than 150 years, journalists have asserted their ability to see the world clearly, to be "objective." In his first issue of the New York Herald, in 1835, James Gordon Bennet announced his intention to "record facts on every public and proper subject, stripped of verbiage and coloring." The implication here is that the world and its movement can be known and named authoritatively, a notion one press historian, Michage Shudson, has called "naive empiricism." Walter Cronkite's nightly farewell reflected an enduring confidence in the power of empiricism: "And that's the way it is."

And today the Columbia Journalism Review and other media journals are filled with references to "objectivity" and warnings about how it might be threatened. It is no less that remarkable that years after consciousness was complicated by Freud, observation was problematized by Einstein, perspective was challenged by Picasso, writing was deconstructed by Derrida, and "objectivity" was abandoned by practically everyone outside newsrooms, "objectivity" is till the style of journalism that our newspaper articles and broadcast reports are written in, or against (p. 5).

Journalists are not naive. "objectivity" for journalists is often a question, not an answer - a point of debate,not a dogma. Until recently, the society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics highlighted "objectivity" as its central tenet; in 1996 "objectivity" was dropped from the code. And in the face of unprecedented competition from various new sources, journalists have been grappling with their mission and with the meaning of "objectivity." Journalists often reveal a skepticism that there is an "objective" "is," unfiltered by our personal lenses. A decade ago, in a seeming acknowledgment of human bias, Rather replaced Cronkite's "And that's the way it is" with his own "And that's part of our world." What you've been watching, Rather seemed to say, is not the world, or even part of the world, but part of out world, through our filters.

Rather signed off. "This is real. And that's part of our world." While Rather was making claims about reality, he was in effect questioning these claims. The same can be said of the Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics, the closest document that American journalists have to a professional oath. The code's changes, including the replacement of "objectivity" with words such as "truth," "accuracy," and "comprehensiveness," are creating a debate within the profession" (pp. 5-6).

What the window, mirror, net, and seesaw share is the idea that somehow journalism is an "objective" craft and that journalists are engaged in a basically passive endeavor. When sitting by a window, holding up a mirror, casting a net, or iniviting participants to ride on a seesaw, journalists, the story goes, are not active constructors of a story. Even when more active verbs are used to describe reportage, as when journalists "gather" poking their noses into an area where others have not yet one. "We don't choose the Man of the Year,: read an advertisement for Time's annual feature. "History does." One of the reasons no one has written a history of "objectivity" is that it's difficult to discuss an ethic that is defined by its practitioners' lack of perspective, bias, and even action.

detachment, nonpartisanship, inverted pyramid, reliance on facts (naive empiricism), balance

truth, fairness, balance they are all similar words, at least in terms of discussions on journalism

While nailing down "objectivity," the writer admitted, "is like nailing Jell-O," he argued that these practices, collectively known as "objectivity," are needed to win his trust (pp. 8-9).

ritual of objectivity, a series of professional routines designed to shield journalists from blame and legal action.

One journalist told me that "objectivity" was not attainable, but like the North Star, was a fixed mark to help journalists stay on the right course (p. 9).

Regarding inverted pyramid style of news writing
In chapter 3, I present evidence that it was not journalists, but the War Department that was using the form during the Civil War. Indeed, I discovered that one of the first writers of inverted pyramids was Edwin M. Stanton, Lincoln's secretary of war. Stanton has found his way into many histories of American journalism, but always because of his notoriety as a press censor. I reconcile Stanton's role as a writer of inverted pyramids with his tight rein in discourse, journalistic and otherwise, and see Stanton's "objective" news writing style and his censorship as related aspects of his repressive social control (p. 13).

By the last years of the nineteenth century, professional journalists' societies arose across America, textbooks told journalism students to "chronicle, don't comment," and wire services had embraced "objectivity" and the idea that reality lies between competing truth claims. But the idea that the world can be seen without human filters is, of course, problematic (p. 14).

[Ida] Well's critique showed that "balance," one of the components of "objectivity" mentioned in modern textbooks, often serves the status quo, and in the case of lynching, is a skewed and dangerous construction (p. 14)


from Conclusion
What we need Rather to do is explain his filters, to tell us how he interprets reality and why we should buy his interpretation. To do so would mean abandoning the myth "objectivity" (p. 142).

Winston Churchill once said that democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the other forms (p. 142).

But given the rising din of people hawking reality, we need to step back and honestly figure out what we do, what we make, what we see, in a world of filters, in a world without "objectivity" (p. 143).


Just the Facts: How "objectivity" came to define American journalism - David T. Z. Mindich

Deuze on Journalism

Liquid Journalism

by Mark Deuze

News is a product that commercial corporations sell to target audiences as defined by marketing departments. As a commodity, it has always competed with the tendency of people to make their own news: pirate radio, alternative media, using the office photocopier as "the people's printing press," activist newsletters pasted on city walls, gossiping in the local pub or market tavern. Yet much of this mediamaking behavior remained conveniently invisible to the journalists of the 20 th century heyday of mass media - a period Hallin (1992) called the "high modernism" of (American) journalism. Reporters and editors convinced themselves they could enact the people's wants and needs through a self-professed doctrine of social responsibility, allowing them to forge a seemingly "unified identity" and "centrality" in a public sphere largely devoid of cultural complexities or social diversity (Hallin, 2006: online). It is during this time that journalism, according to Hartley, emerged as the primary sense-making practice of modernity (1996: 12). In terms of journalism's "modernist bias of its official self-presentation" (Zelizer, 2004: 112), its scholars and its practitioners came to see the work and product of professional journalism as the cornerstone of modern society, and more particularly: the nation-state and its institutional elites. As Carey (1996) has noted explicitly: "Journalism is another name for democracy or, better, you cannot have journalism without democracy. The practices of journalism are not self-justifying; rather, they are justified in terms of the social consequences they engender, namely the constitution of a democratic social order" (online).

Much has changed since those days. Consider the following conclusion from a series of research projects by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in 2005: "Sitting down with the news on a set schedule has become a thing of the past for many time-pressured Americans [...] More people are turning away from traditional news outlets [...] At the same time, public discontent with the news media has increased dramatically. Americans find the mainstream media much less credible than they did in the mid-1980s. They are even more critical of the way the press collects and reports the news. More ominously, the public also questions the news media's core values and morality." Reports in most well established democracies around the world signal similar trends. Corporate journalism has lost its "sense of wholeness and seamlessness" observed by Hallin (1992: 14), but not necessarily because of the collapse of political consensus or increasing market forces, as he suggests. What journalism has lost, as it is produced within the confines of mainstream news media corporations, is 'touch' with what sociologists like to call reflexive or liquid modernity (Bauman, 2000). The contemporary condition of everyday life can best be understood as a process of radical "modernization of modern society" (Beck, Bonss & Lau, 2003: 1), where "liquid modern society and liquid life are locked in a veritable perpetuum mobile" (Bauman, 2005: 12). The key to these assumptions is the common perception among people of all walks of life that we live in times of fast-paced, uncontrollable, and unsettling radical change. In today's global society such a widely shared sense of accelerated change is no longer a break in the otherwise fairly stable routine of everyday existence; instead, it has become the structural condition of contemporary 'liquid' life: "We live today under conditions of permanent revolution . Revolution is the way society lives nowadays. Revolution has become human society's normal state" (Bauman, 2002: 17).

On the one hand, social philosophers like Beck, Giddens, Rorty and Bauman see the role media play in this process as a mere mirror of the changes taking place in world society. On the other hand, theorists like Manovich (2001), Levy (1997) and Fidler (1997), see a more independent role for media's impact on economical, political and cultural trends. Fidler, for example, attributes much of our sense of continuous change to "the unexpected cross-impact of maturing technologies" (1997: 2). This process, which Fidler calls 'mediamorphosis', suggests how a sense of revolutionary change is a given in the social shaping of technologies, even though the way people organize (and are organized by) the social exchange of information has not changed much in the history of news. Stephens (1988: 289), for example, has noted how the main differences between news through the ages has been its increased amplification, in turn largely facilitated through the introduction and development of new information and communication technologies (ICTs). It is in the way people engage disruptive new ICTs such as Internet that the conditions of permanent change get expressed. Technological innovation and adoption processes can be seen as evolutionary in a Darwinian sense, in that whichever technology - as in: device, code or protocol - is dominant at any given point in time is not necessarily the 'best', but rather the more 'fitting' with the prevailing culture. This in turn suggests that the various ways in which certain cultural industries - such as the news media - adapt and adopt new media tend to reinforce and perhaps subtly modify existing power relationships. The fascinating dilemma of understanding 21st century technological and social change thus must be how to reconcile a common sense of permanent revolution with a macro-theoretical observation of adaptive evolution. The key, I would argue, lies in the reciprocity of the two concepts, and this may be what makes our liquid modern times exciting as well as deeply unsettling. For the purposes of this essay, I aim to establish the mutually enabling characteristics of old versus new media as the basis for my consideration of the future of news.

Remediation

Bolter and Grusin (1999) dub the transitory process of old to new media as one of ongoing 'remediation', where old media are refashioned in new media which in turn force previous media to redesign themselves accordingly. Their work builds on the insights of McLuhan, stressing the mutual implication of old and new media. Extending such a definition of media, I would like to argue that 'media' in this context refers to its artifacts (cf. the hardware and software of ICTs) as well as its uses and social applications, as this allows us to see the symbiotic relationships between technological and social change when, for example, studying how news organizations refashion themselves to meet the demands of technology and society. Sennett (1998: 96) argues that "it takes institutions a long time to digest the technologies they ingest." This may be true. But it underestimates the perception and sense of continuous change the rapid introduction of new media bring to the workfloor of media industries, as noted by scholars of news production around the world like Singer, Boczkowski, Cottle, Domingo, Heinonen, Quinn, and Deuze. It is thus important to note that any consideration of the future of news and political communication has to involve not only an awareness of how the social systems of journalism and politics self-organize to adapt to new circumstances while maintaining their internal power structures, but also how the contemporary condition of liquid modernity and its sense of permanent revolution wreaks havoc on the very foundations of these institutions - at the same time.

The constant tweaking, revamping, developing, adopting as well as abandoning of new media in the office (as well as at home) is a relatively recent phenomenon, but it has accelerated in the last decade or so. It is exactly this period when contemporary observers have seen all kinds of rapid changes and feverish developments occurring in the realm of the social, particularly pointing towards the parallel trends of increasing globalization and individualization permeating all aspects of everyday life. Although people and social systems around the world respond to such sweeping changes differently, the impact of permanent revolution on society manifests itself most clearly in our increasing uncertainty, anxiety and disagreement about the exact meaning, role and function of such well-established features of modern life as the role of the state, the church, the family, and of professional journalism (Bauman, 2000). The added value of a social perspective offers media theory an important marker for understanding this status quo. The ambiguity of liquid modern life extends to the way we respond to and interact with new media. Fidler notes that we tend to overestimate the short-term impact of new media, failing to fully appreciate the complex and evolutionary trends expressed in the maturation processes of information and communication technologies. A more nuanced perspective, advocated by most contemporary scholars of new media, would move beyond such feverish expectations or delusions and look at new media in terms of how they take root next to and in a symbiotic relationship with existing media. Following Bauman, let me emphasize that these (r)evolutionary trends do not lead to some kind of 'new' stable media ecosystem as suggested by such media-centric approaches; no, disequilibrium and liquidity are the permanent condition, and get expressed both in the social as well as the technological.

Journalism and "high modernity"

Media as social institutions do not escape the sense of accelerated, unsettling change permeating liquid modern life, and it is exactly this notion of volatile, uncertain (global and local) flux that professional journalism fails to come to terms with. If we look at the various ways in which the news industry has tried to integrate, or at the very least give some kind of coherent meaning to, disruptive technologies like Internet and social trends like individualization or globalization, one can see how journalism still depends on its established mode of production, through which it largely (and unreflexively) reproduces the institutional contours of high (or: 'solid') modernity. Thus journalism, as it moved online in the late 1990s, consistently offered shoveled, repurposed and windowed content for free, cannibalizing on its core product while treating its Web presence as an advertisement for the offline product. In doing so, it remediated not only its product, but also its production process online, including but not limited to its established ways of doing things, its news culture, and its occupational ideology (Deuze, 2005). The primary function of the multitude online thus became the same as people were expected to behave offline, as publics : audiences to be sold to advertisers. In the same vein, journalism has engaged the individualized society in terms of its presupposed "audience fragmentation," which in turn has reified professional journalisms' position as the primary gatekeeper and information provider in society. Globalization has a particular impact on the making of news, as it forces journalists to translate events occurring all over the world involving all kinds of people to their local constituencies -communities made up of peoples, religions, and cultural practices with roots in different parts of the world. For most of the 20 th century journalists have ignored the complexities when covering 'the world', combining narrow-minded frameworks like Orientalism (as eminently argued by Edward Said), and ethnocentrism and small-town pastoralism (following Herbert Gans).

A new media ecology

The 21st century can tentatively be seen as a period when the developed world enters the second 'liquid' phase of modernity, where all existing modern social, economical and political institutions - organized religion, the nuclear family, professional journalism, the nation-state - have become what Giddens (2002) sees as hollowed out 'shell' institutions. Beck (2002) goes a step further, suggesting that most academic and professional observers of second modernity tend to interpret every social phenomenon within the gaze of the social institutions of 'solid' modernity - particularly the gaze of the nation-state - and thus have been guilty of practicing a 'zombie sociology'. Reinterpreting Beck's argument for the purposes of this essay, professional and high modern journalism can be considered to have been clinically dead for a long time - but it is unable to die. In this perspective, journalism makes a product without consumers, delivers news without effect, and claims social responsibility without a constituency that would legitimate such representation. Instead of being able to rely on such institutions for providing some automatic or consensual function in our lives, it is up to each and every one of us to enter into a complex and ongoing negotiation with them, of which the outcome will always be uncertain. This process coincides with the emergence of a post-industrial information culture, typified by Manovich (2001) as a global remix between culture and computers. The establishment of a global network society, as Castells (2000) has shown, further erodes the traditional foundations of a nation-based informed citizenry on which the social responsibility of the press is premised. As Castells would have it, the 'hypersociability' of networked individualism is the new form of postnational social cohesion, "enhancing the capacity of individuals to rebuild structures of sociability from the bottom up" (2001: 132). What is expected of us in such a society is to acquire the skills and resources necessary to navigate complex and interactive social and technological networks on our own. This shifts our core competencies away from so-called 'expert' systems - like journalism or the academe - to what Levy (1997) sees as a form of collective intelligence particular of cyberculture, where knowledge about any given topic or subject is based on the ongoing exchange of views, opinions and information between many rather than pulling the wisdom of a few. In this context, Hartley (2002) predicts the emergence of a global 'redactional' society, where the core competences once exclusively associated with professional journalism are increasingly necessary for every citizen to guarantee survival in a networked information age. Journalism has become not so much the property of what journalists do in order to sell news, but what people all over the world engage in on a daily basis in order to survive, coping with "modernity's extreme dynamism" (Giddens, 1991: 16), and the permanent revolution of liquid life (Bauman, 2005).

It is in this context that a new media ecosystem (Bowman & Willis, 2005), or new media ecology, is taking shape. I have previously drawn distinctions between different and recombinant functions of journalism in such a new media system, where its news professionals will have to find ways to strike a balance between their identities as providers of editorial content, and of public connectivity (as in providing and amplifying a platform for what Carey has posited as the discussion society ideal-typically has with itself). Secondly, the profession would have to articulate an equilibrium between its operationally closed working culture strictly relying on a ruling elite of 'experts', and a more collaborative, responsive, interactive or even dialogical journalistic culture (Deuze, 2003: 219). Of such a complex new media ecology one can see Internet (and all what we do online) as a primary manifestation, where people empowered by increasingly cheaper and easier-to-use technologies participate actively in their own 'newsmaking'. People engage each other and the global network of computers in a wide variety of ways, from responding via e-mail to a breaking news story to collectively producing 'citizen journalism' Websites powerful enough to influence presidential elections -as in the case of Ohmynews in South Korea. What is particularly salient about these trends is a further blurring of the carefully cultivated dividing lines between professional and amateurs, and between producers and consumers of media. Jenkins (2003) describes this development as the emergence of a 'convergence culture', indicating a shift within media companies towards a more inclusive production process fostering "a new participatory folk culture by giving average people the tools to archive, annotate, appropriate and recirculate content" (online). There is no doubt that a future news system will be based - at least in part - on an interactive and connective mode of production where media makers and users will co-exist, collaborate and thus effectively compete to play a part in the mutual (yet never consensual, as Niklas Luhmann has noted) construction of reality. On a concluding hopeful note, Balnaves, Mayrhofer and Shoesmith (2004) consider such a shift towards a more engaged, emancipatory and participatory relationship between media professionals and their publics an example of a 'new humanism' in the domains of public relations, journalism and advertising, constituting " an antidote to narrow corporate-centric ways of representing interests in modern society" (p.192).

Liquid journalism

For journalism, all of this means, in part, that value attributed to media content will be increasingly determined by the interactions between users and producers rather than the product (cf. news ) itself. However, the real significance of the argument outlined here is that we have to acknowledge that the key characteristics of current social trends - uncertainty, flux, change, unpredictability, or perhaps: 'kludginess' (paraphrasing Jenkins, 2004: 34) - are what defines the current and future state of affairs in how people make and use journalism all around the world, even though we can at the same time see how the traditional hierarchical organization of society extends into the information culture of the global network society. In terms of business praxis, this means we will see a bewildering variety of top-down, hierarchical and extremely closed-off types of corporate enclosures of the commons existing next to peer-driven forms of collaborative ownership regarding the manufacture of news. In terms of media production processes, we will continue to witness a mix of "one-size-fits-all" content made for largely invisible mass audiences next to (and infused by) rich forms of transmedia storytelling including elements of user control and 'prosumer'-type agency. In a way, it will be a mess - which makes the careful and socially realistic study of what people in their shapeshifting identities as consumers as well as producers of (news) media actually do all the more important.

Instead of lamenting or celebrating this process, or trying to find a fixed point somewhere in the future in our failed predictions of where we are going, we should embrace the uncertainty and complexity of the emerging new media ecology, and enjoy it for what it is: an endless resource for the generation of content and experiences by a growing number of people all around the world. Part of what will happen will reproduce existing power relationships and inequalities, for sure. Yet we are also witnessing an unparalleled degree of human agency and user control in our lived experience of mediated reality. A journalism that successfully embraces and engages this ecology will have to become fluid itself: a liquid journalism . The future of news will be determined by the extent of its liquidity, its ability to navigate the different and sometimes conflicting expectations of a world citizenry, and our willingness - as journalism scholars and educators - to teach students more than just the tools of a dead (or dying) trade. In its dominant, Western, and professional form, journalism is a zombie institution, incapable of dealing with the unsettling complexity of the problems and challenges in contemporary liquid life. So let me end on this slightly utopian note: to earn its legitimacy as one of the key sensemakers of liquid modernity, journalism (studies, education and praxis) has to evolve, and become a liquid journalism.

Mark Deuze is Assistant Professor in the Department of Telecommunications, Indiana University.

REFERENCES

Balnaves, Mark, Mayrhofer, Debra, Shoesmith, Brian (2004) Media professions and the new humanism. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 18, 191-203.

Bauman, Zygmunt (2000)Liquid modernity. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Bauman, Zygmunt (2002) The 20th century: the end or a beginning? Thesis Eleven 70, 15-25.

Bauman, Zygmunt (2005) Liquid life. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Beck, Ulrich (2002) Power and Countervailing Power in the Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Beck, Ulrich, Bonns, Wolfgang, Lau, Christoph (2003). The theory of reflexive modernization: problematic, hypotheses and research programme. Theory, Culture & Society 20, 1-33.

Bolter, Jay David, and Richard Grusin. (1999) Remediation: understanding new media . Cambridge: The MIT Press.

Bowman, Shaun and Chris Willis. (2005) Nieman Reports: the future is here, but do news media companies see it? (online). Hypergene blog entry Thursday 22 December 2005. URL: http://www.hypergene.net/blog/weblog.php?id=P327 [2005, December 24].

Castells, Manuel (2000) The rise of the network society. 2nd edition. Oxford: Blackwell.

Castells, Manuel (2001)The Internet galaxy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Carey, James (1996)Where journalism education went wrong (online). Presentation at the 1996 Seigenthaler Conference at the Middle Tennessee State University, US. URL: http://www.mtsu.edu/~masscomm/seig96/carey/carey.htm [2002, August 30].

Deuze, Mark (2003 The Web and its journalisms: considering the consequences of different types of news media online. New Media & Society 5, 203-230.

Deuze, Mark (2005) What is journalism? professional identity and ideology of journalists reconsidered. Journalism Theory Practice & Criticism 6, 443-465.

Giddens, Anthony (1991)Modernity and self-identity: self and society in the late modern age. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

Giddens, Anthony (2002) Runaway world: how globalization is reshaping our lives. London: Routledge.

Hallin, Dan (1992) The passing of the "high modernism" of American journalism. Journal of Communication 42, 14-25.

Hartley, John (1996)Popular reality: journalism, modernity and popular culture. London: Arnold.

Hartley, John (2002) Communication, cultural and media studies: the key concepts. 3rd edition. London: Routledge.

Jenkins, Henry (2003). Quentin Tarantino's Star Wars? Digital cinema, media convergence and participatory culture (online). In David Thorburn and Henry Jenkins (eds.), Rethinking media change. Cambridge: MIT Press. URL: http://web.mit.edu/cms/People/henry3/starwars.html [2005, October 25].

Jenkins, Henry (2004). The cultural logic of media convergence. International Journal of Cultural Studies 7, 33-43.

Lévy, Pierre (1997) Collective intelligence: mankind's emerging world in cyberspace. Translated by Robert Bononno. Cambridge: Perseus Books.

Manovich, Lev (2001) The language of new media . Cambridge: MIT Press.

Zelizer, Barbie (2004) When facts, truth and reality are God-terms: on journalism's uneasy place in cultural studies. Communication and Critical/Cultural Studies 1, 100-119.

http://frank.mtsu.edu/~pcr/1601_2005_winter/roundtable_Deuze.htm

Privacy & Lurking

스포츠서울의 이효리 열애설 보도 어떻게 봐야 하나? (content drawn from dailyseop.com)

[칼럼] 기자를 교육하는 강사가 본 이효리 사건
입력 :2008-09-20 10:19:00 이승훈 칼럼니스트
이효리 열애설을 보도한 모스포츠신문사와 이효리 측 사이에 명예훼손, 초상권, 프라이버시 침해 등으로 논란이 벌어지고 있습니다.

스포츠서울닷컴 기자 블로그에서는 권리침해를 주장한 이효리 측에 대해서 "(우리 나라 연예계 풍토의 뻔한 사고대응 방식인) '부인-법적대응-잊혀질 때까지 시간끌기'를 보이고 있다"고 할리우드 연예계를 보도하는 미국 언론과의 풍토를 대비하면서 (우리 나라에서는) 기자생활이 어렵다는 고충을 토로하고 있습니다.

▶ 관련기사 : 명예훼손,초상권침해,사생활침해?..."이효리 때문에 기자생활 회의 느낀다" -스포츠서울 블로그(2008.9.18) 바로가기

그러나 스포츠서울 측의 이 같은 하소연이 독자들에게 설득력을 가질 수 있을지 의문입니다. 이미 해당 블로그 댓글에는 스포츠서울닷컴 측을 비난하는 댓글로 가득찬 상태네요. 이효리 열애설 보도 과정을 이효리측의 반론과 스포츠서울측의 재반론을 통해서 살펴보고 과연 명예훼손 등에 해당하는지 알아보겠습니다. (일단, 공연성 기타 등등 명예훼손성립을 위한 다른 구성요건 요소들은 논란이 되지 않는다고 보고 논란이 되고 있는 부분만을 따로 분석합니다.)

일단, 한국법체제상 명예훼손의 기본 법리는 진실을 보도해도 명예훼손이 될 수 있다는 점에서 진실을 보도하면 명예훼손이 되지 않는 미국법체계와 다르다는 점을 주의해야 합니다. 미국의 경우는 진실을 보도할 경우는 프라이버시 아니면 비방·중상에 관한 불법행위로 다스리기 때문에 진실을 말할 때도 절대적으로 처벌받지 않는 것은 아니지만 어쨋든 이런 점에서 볼 때 우리 나라의 경우는 미국보다 명예훼손이 성립하기가 쉽습니다.

또, 우리 나라의 경우는 명예훼손의 구성요건에 해당하더라도 공익에 관한 내용으로서 진실한 보도일 때는 위법성을 조각해서 명예훼손이 성립할 수 없도록 하고있는데 이번 사건은 출판물에 의한 명예훼손이기 때문에 일반적인 명예훼손과는 달리 보아야할 필요가 있습니다. 출판물에 의한 명예훼손의 경우는 이러한 명예훼손의 위법성 조각사유가 적용되지 않기 때문이지요.

그렇다 하더라도 출판물에 의한 명예훼손의 경우는 비방의 목적이 있을 것을 요구하기 때문에 무조건 처벌되는 것은 아닙니다. 여기서 비방의 목적이 있다 없다를 판단하는 것은 매우 어려운 일입니다. 판단하기가 애매할 경우 우리 판례경향은 공익과의 관련성을 따져 비방의 목적을 판단합니다. 해당 사안이 공공의 이익에 관한 것일 때는 일단은 '비방의 목적'이 없다고 보는 것이죠. 이렇게 비방의 목적이 없다고 추정되면 입증책임이 상대방에게 넘어가기 때문에 공익성의 존재 여부에 대한 판단은 매우 중요한 부분입니다.

대법원의 확립된 판례경향은 이렇습니다. "사람을 비방할 목적이란 가해의 의사 내지 목적을 요하는 것으로서 공공의 이익을 위한 것과는 행위자의 주관적 의도의 방향에 있어 서로 상반되는 관계에 있다고 할 것이므로, 적시한 사실이 공공의 이익에 관한 것인 때에는 특별한 사정이 없는 한 비방의 목적은 부인된다" 대법원 1998. 10. 9. 선고 97도158 판결에서 나온 '비방의 목적'에 관한 정의인데 대법원 2000. 2. 25. 선고 98도2188 판결에 그대로 똑같이 사용됩니다. 확립된 판례 경향인 것이죠.

이번 사안의 경우 스포츠서울기자 블로그는 "이효리가 국내 톱스타이고 대중이 이효리의 뉴스를 즐겁고 비중있게 소비하고 있다면 문화적인 측면에서 (이효리의 사생활을 다루는 기사에) 공익적인 면이 없다고 말할 순 없다."고 말하고 있지만 이 주장은 대중적 관심을 공익으로 바로 치환하는 논리에 근거하고 있기 때문에 실제로 법적공방을 한다면 스포츠서울측의 주장이 받아들여지지 않을 가능성이 높습니다. 언론사의 경우는 공기(公器)로 여겨지기 때문에 애매한 경우 언론사의 보도는 대체로 공익적 목적이 있다고 봐줍니다. 일반 블로그 글들에 대한 일종의 특혜라고 할 수 있습니다.

그런데 스포츠서울이 보도한 기사의 내용은 이효리가 재벌2세와 열애를 하고 있다는 내용인데요, 이것은 대중적 관심사항일 수는 있지만 이것이 공익에 관한 사항이라고 말할 수는 없습니다. 대중적 관심을 끄는 아이템이라면 아무런 제한 없이 '공익'을 주장하면서 무조건 보도할 수 있다고는 말할 수 없기 때문입니다. 난장판이 되는 언론, 미디어를 바라는 것은 아니겠지요? 스포츠서울 쪽의 글을 읽다보면 스포츠신문의 입장에서는 "대중적 관심, 그게 바로 '공익'이다"라고 하는 것 같은데 그건 너무 자기중심적 발상입니다.

결론적으로 스포츠서울의 보도는 따로 공익 관련성을 제시하지 못하는 이상 출판물에 의한 명예훼손에서 조금 불리한 입장에 있습니다. 자칫 "이효리라는 배우도 역시 어쩔 수 없이 재벌2세와..." 하는 오해를 불러일으킬 수도 있거든요. 여기서 다시 스포츠서울 쪽에 불리한 사정은, 이효리측이 "모임이 오래전 부터 여러 사람이 같이 지내왔던 친목모임이고 해당 장소에서도 여러 사람들이 같이 있었는데도 불구하고 스포츠서울이 이효리와 재벌2세 모씨만을 따로 편집해서 열애설에 맞춰 보도했다는 점에서 스포츠서울 쪽이 사실관계를 왜곡했다"는 주장을 하고 있다는 것입니다.

주변 맥락 설명이나 '열애설'로 유도하는 정황 설명이 없이 단순히 이효리씨와 재벌2세가 같이 수영장에 있는 모습을 보도한다면 프라이버시침해 문제는 차치하고 명예훼손의 문제는 '비방'의 목적을 확인하는 부분이 어렵게 됩니다만 이번 스포츠서울의 보도는 '열애설'로 몰아갔다는 측면에서 비방의 목적 판단이나 진실한 서술 여부에 대한 판단에서 스포츠서울쪽이 스스로 문제를 악화시켜서 더욱 더 불리한 상황에 이르렀습니다. 확인 없이 사실관계를 왜곡했다면 진실한 내용을 말한 것으로 보기는 어렵습니다.

그럼 이제 초상권과 프라이버시 침해의 문제를 볼까요? 초상권과 프라이버시의 문제는 사실 우리 나라에서는 입법을 위한 시도가 있기는 했지만 아직까지 구체적인 법조항이 마련되지 않은 상태이고 헌법상의 기본권의 한 내용으로 취급되고 있습니다. 조리(일반적인 상식)에 따라 취급되고 특별한 법규가 없다보니 형사적으로는 주거침입이나 명예훼손 안에서 다뤄지는 경우도 있고 아직 체계적이지 못합니다.

미국의 프라이버시권의 경우는 판례상 형성돼 있고 이것들이 Video Voyeurism Prevention Act (비디오관음방지법) 등 개개 법률에 규정이 되어가고 있는 추세인데요 사생활의 비밀과 자유에 관한권리, 주거와 통신의 불가침 등 기타 권리를 포함하고 있는 넓은 개념입니다. 우리 나라의 경우는 특별히 주거와 통신은 따로 규정돼 있기 때문에 사생활의 비밀과 자유에 관한 권리에 한정해서 프라이버시권을 이해하고 있습니다.

프라이버시권의 내용은 비밀유지의 권리 즉, 개인의 사생활에 관한 부분을 본인의 의사에 반해 공개되지 않도록 요구할 권리. 개인의 사적인 생활사의 공개금지 권리 등으로 구성되는데 개인의 사적인 생활사의 공개가 불법으로 되기위해서는 1, 사실을 공공연하게 공개하는 행위일 것, 공개된 사실은 사적인 사항일 것, 비밀침해의 정도는 보통의 감수성을 가진 합리적인 인간의 감정을 침해하는 것일 것 등입니다.

이번 열애설 보도에서는 이효리의 열애설 당사자로 지목된 재벌2세 최모씨의 얼굴이 노출됐다는 점에서 초상권 침해 부분은 좀 더 넓게 부각될 것 같네요. 사인들이 모인 공간에서의 사생활에 관한 부분을 은밀히 접근해 취재했다는 점에서 프라이버시 침해 논란도 발생하게 됩니다만 호텔 수영장에서 노출된 행위를 보도하는 것이 프라이버시 침해가 될지는 확정적인 언급을 할 수 없습니다. 프라이버시 침해의 요건 중에서 비밀침해의 정도가 얼마나 중하냐는 부분에서 판단이 갈릴 수도 있기 때문입니다. 구체적인 정황을 더 봐야합니다만 밝혀진 게 없으니 이쯤에서 마무리 하겠습니다.

스포츠서울이 초상권 침해와 프라이버시 침해의 책임을 벗어나는 방법은 공익을 내세우는 것이 최선책이지만, 공인이나 준(準)공인도 사생활 영역이 있기 때문에 이들에 관한 사항이 바로 공익에 관한 사항이 되는 것도 아니며 앞서 말한 바와 같이 대중적 관심을 끄는 사항이 바로 공익과 관련이 있다고도 말할 수 없기 때문에 초상권 침해와 프라이버시 침해의 책임이 없다고 주장하기에는 상당히 어려움이 있을 것으로 보입니다.


한편, 스포츠서울이 이번 열애설 보도를 함에 있어서 몰래카메라 취재를 했다는 점에서 또 다른 문제를 불러일으킵니다. 몰래카메라와 관해 1997년 푸드라이온 대 ABC 사건 판결이 났는데 이 때부터 전세계 언론사들에게 보도 방법상, 절차상의 적합성에 대한 인식이 생겨나기 시작할 정도로 그 사건은 획기적인 사건입니다. 현재는 보도 방법상 절차상의 적합성을 지켜야할 요구가 높아진 상태입니다. 몰래카메라 보도를 전문 용어로 러킹(Lurking)이라고 합니다. 러킹으로 취재를 하면 일단 그 자체가 불법행위로 돼 문제가 되고 공익과의 관련성이 없으면 프라이버시 침해 논란이 발생하는 경우가 일반적입니다. 푸드라이온 사건에서는 공익과의 관련성이 있었음에도 불구하고 러킹 부분에 불법행위를 인정해서 벌금을 매겼습니다.

스포츠서울 쪽은 헐리우드 언론 보도에서는 "세계적인 톱스타들의 속옷노출 사진은 물론이고 클럽출입 장면 등등 지극히 사적인 사진들까지 그대로 보도된다"면서 그래도 아무 문제 없다는 듯 말하고 있지만 이는 프라이버시법에 관한 법리에 대한 무지에서 비롯된 발언입니다. 미국에서는 프라이버시 법리상 많은 사람들의 눈에 노출된 열린 공간에서의 행위를 보도하는 것은 프라이버시 침해가 될 수 없다는 '공적영역 사적영역 이분법'이 통용돼 있거든요. 우리 나라의 경우는 프라이버시 침해가 될 수 있다는 점에서 미국법 우리나라법이 다른 겁니다.

즉,세계적인 톱스타가 차량에서 내려 시상식으로 가려는 순간을 찍으로 포토라인에 기다리고 있다가 우연히 치마 속 팬티 노출 장면이 보여 이를 사진으로 보도하면 이는 공적영역(대중의 시선에 노출된 곳)에서 벌어진 일이라서 프라이버시 침해가 되지 않을 가능성이 높습니다. 클럽에 들어가는 장면을 찍어도 공적 영역에서 벌어진 일이라 당연히 아무런 문제가 되지 않습니다. 그러나 은밀히 스타의 사적 영역에 잠입해서 그러한 사진을 찍으면 그 언론사는 사적영역에서 벌어진 일이라 프라이버시 침해가 인정될 가능성이 높습니다.

그런데 이런 미국에도 최근에는 공연히 노출된 공간에서의 행위를 보도하는 것에 대해서 '공적영역 사적영역 이분법'으로 일률적으로 처리하는 것이 불합리하다는 주장이 강력히 제기되고 있습니다. 이런 주장을 하는 학자가 프라이버시법 분야의 세계적인 권위자인 다니엘 J 솔로브교수입니다. 솔로브교수의 주장에 따르면 노출된 공간에서도 보호돼야할 프라이버시는 있다는 거지요. 예를 들자면 마트나 약국에서 생리대나 비만퇴치약을 사는 행위가 노출된 공간에서 벌어진 일이기 때문에 그런 (수치스러울 수 있습니다) 부분을 밝혀서 보도해도 프라이버시 침해가 안된다는 기존의 논리는 불합리하다는 겁니다.

설명이 길었습니다. 지금까지의 설명을 간단히 요약하겠습니다.

1.명예훼손법리와 프라이버시 법리는 우리나라와 미국의 법리가 서로 다르다.

2.출판물에 의한 명예훼손의 경우는 일반적인 명예훼손과는 달리 공익에 관한 진실한 사항을 보도해도 명예훼손이 성립할 수 있다.
3.출판물에 의한 명예훼손의 경우는 보도 대상에 대한 비방의 목적이 있어야만 성립한다.
4.비방의 목적의 판단은 공익과의 관련성에서 판단되는 경우가 일반적이다.

5.스포츠서울은 대중적관심 사항이 곧 공익에 관한 사항이라고 하지만 대중적관심사항이 곧 공익에 관한 사항이 되는 것은 아니다.
6.스포츠서울의 보도는 열애설로 몰고 갔다는 측면에서 비방의 목적 존재 여부에서 불리하다.
7.사적영역에 몰래 잠입해 취재하는 러킹 취재는 그 자체로 불법행위이며 프라이버시 침해로 이어진다.
8. 스포츠서울의 보도는 개인에 관한 사사(私事)의 공개로 되어 일단 프라이버시침해로 될 가능성이 높고 비밀침해 정도가 평균인의 감정을 침해하는 정도냐에서 침해여부에 대한 판단이 갈려질 수 있다.

9.할리우드 연예통신에서 보이는 스타속옷 사진 보도는 많은 사람들의 눈에 노출된 것을 보도하면 프라이버시침해가 안된다는 미국법 특유의 공적영역 사적영역 이분법에 따른 것이고 우리 나라는 이와는 달리 규율된다. 그리고 미국내에서도 공적영역 사적영역 이분법에 따른 프라이버시 규율이 부당하다는 주장이 제기되고 있는 중이다

10. 결론적으로 스포츠서울은 출판물에 의한 명예훼손과 초상권 침해, 프라이버시침해, 러킹에 의한 불법행위 등이 인정될 가능성이 높기 때문에 지금처럼 "언론사가 도대체 잘못한 게 뭐 있냐"는 식으로 나오면 여론마저 돌아서고 사정은 악화되기만 한다. 자중해야 한다.

부연 : 제가 확정적 어조를 쓰지 않고 '가능성'이라는 표현을 쓰는 이유는 제가 법관도 아닌데다가 구체적 사정을 완전히 다 알 수 없는 상황에서 쓰기 때문입니다. 일단 지금까지 양쪽에서 언급된 상황을 봤을 때 제 개인적인 견해는 스포츠서울의 불법행위가 인정될 가능성이 높다는 쪽입니다.

이 같은 사항을 스포츠서울이 법적 논란을 벗어나면서 보도하려면 어떻게 해야할까요?

일반적인 언론사의 경우 : 이번 경우는 사사로운 일에 관한 보도이기 때문에 사사로운 일들이 벌어지고 있는 영역에 대한 접근 및 취재에 대한 사전 양해를 구해야 합니다. 사전 양해가 없으면 사후 동의라도 받아야 합니다. 사전 양해, 사후 동의를 받을 수 없다면 플레인뷰 원칙(많은 사람들에 노출된 공간에서의 일을 취재하는 것에 대한 일반인의 묵시적 승인)이 있는지 판단하고 이것도 애매할 때는 공익과의 관련성을 판단해 보도를 결정하게 됩니다. 대중적 관심사항만으로 공익과의 관련성이 인정되지 않기 때문에 대중적 관심사항 외에 공익과의 관련성이 어떤 것이 있는지를 판단해서 보도를 결정합니다. 공익관련성이 인정돼도 잠입취재는 별도로 불법행위가 성립될 수도 있습니다.

막가파식 언론사의 경우 : 공익과의 관련성 생각하지 않고 무조건 구독수를 늘리기 위해 일정부분 비난을 받는 것을 감수하고서라도 법적 책임만 안받으면 된다는 막가파식 언론사의 경우에는 일단 사적 영역에 침입하는 것은 역시 허용되지 않기 때문에 공적인 영역(많은 사람들의 눈에 쉽게 띄는 영역이라는 뜻임)에서 죽치고 찬스를 노려야합니다. 공적인 영역에서 운좋게 사진을 확보했다면 소설 쓰듯 없는 말 지어내지 말고 솔직담백하게 있는 그대로 "~하는 모습이 찍혔다"로 보도합니다. 물론 이 때도 허용되는 경우는 수정헌법 1조, 공적영역 사적영역 2분법 관행 등 표현의 자유가 매우 강하게 보호되는 미국이라는 나라의 특수한 법체계 하에서 허용된다는 것입니다. 우리 나라에서는 인정되지 않을 가능성이 높습니다. 공적인 영역에서 여배우가 차에서 내리다가 실수로 팬티가 보였는데 이를 보도하면 외국법상에서는 프라이버시침해와 명예훼손죄가 성립하지 않을 가능성이 높지만 우리 나라 법에서는 다릅니다. 문화가 다르거든요. 그 사회의 평균적인 감수성을 가진 사람의 감정을 침해했느냐의 여부가 중요합니다.

덧붙여, 블로거 기자의 경우 : 블로거 기자는 언론사 기자와는 다르게 언론으로 취급되지 않는 것이 우리 나라 법제도입니다. 언론사 기자에 비해 불리한 부분은 출판물에 의한 명예훼손 부분에서 '비방의 목적'여부에서 특별한 사정이 없으면 비방의 목적이 없다고 봐주는 언론사 기자보다 불리합니다. 공익성 여부를 신중히 판단하셔야합니다. 장황하기는 하지만 지금까지 위에서 제가 설명한 부분은 중요하니 이 부분을 명심하시고 글을 쓰셔야합니다. 명예훼손으로 벌금 무는 블로거들 수도 없이 봤습니다. 명예훼손, 프라이버시, 저작권 침해 문제와 관해 궁금하신 점이 있으면 메일 주세요. 언제든지 답변 드리겠습니다.

이승훈/칼럼니스트