Sub edited version: Cyber bullying, you’re concern or not? Hey guys,in today’s news teenagers are becoming more and more unsafe to cyber bullying on social media. A recent study shows that 40% of teenagers are targets of cyber bullying, are you part of this alarming percentage? (cut to VT) From on the playground to online, bullying has changed over the past year. Cyber bullying is when people will go online, social media for example, and say mean things and publicly embarrass someone online and publicly embarrass someone online.
So, why do people cyber bully? People cyber bully because they themselves are going through something hard, and find it easy to hurt someone so they don’t feel alone. Or they do it just fro entertainment, to seem cool to other kids.
People target people who ate different to them. As the internet grows and develops so does cyber bulling. People can cyber bully by posting something mean or creating a mean picture about somebody and sharing that online.
From an anti bullying website, it says that the effects for cyber bullying is that kids and teenagers feel bad about themselves, they no longer want to talk to or be with their friends or family, separating themselves from them.
In a recent study, it states that up to 92% of teens go online daily, 24% say they always go online. The internet us now easily available, as everyone now has a phone, laptop or tablet.
In another study, it says that up to 71% of teenagers have more than one social media account. This making teenagers an easy target for cyber bullies.
(cut to studio)And now we get an interview with Jasmine and her cyber bullying experience (cut to video interview)
Thank you Jasmine, so how can we make cyber bullying stop? The answer is you, people like you at home can help. If you see anyone getting cyber bullied, report it, tell someone. An adult knowing will help stop this problem. And for lighter news…..
Time Code: What is the purpose of your article that you have to write? 0:08 Who is the audience? 0:39 Should the language be informal or formal and why? 1:33 Is the style direct or indirect and why? 2:19 Should the tone be teacher to pupil, parent to child or peer to peer? Remember this is Newsround what is the expected tone and how does your article achieve this? 2:50 Why did you use the images / video you used? How did they enhance the article for the audience? 4:01 Are your initial sentences structured so that the ‘who’, ‘what’ and ‘where’ is clear in the opening paragraph? Give examples. 5:23 Does your next few paragraphs include the ‘why’ and ‘how’.? Give examples 6:29 Did you include at least two of the most useful and valid sources that were evaluated in D1? Discuss how these enhanced your article. 7:40
Finished broadcast programme
List at least three ways that the article breaks or does not break the Editor’s Code of Practice and explain why.
This does not break rule 2. Privacy of Editors Code of practice, as I was given permission to use the persons name I was interviewing. I asked beforehand whether or not I could use their name and they agreed to it. I also didn’t give away her age as I didn’t receive any permission to do so, therefore it still respects the persons privacy. By not revealing anything other than her name, I followed the Data Protection Act, therefore I didn’t break any rules regarding that. By not revealing any personal data it follows rule 14.Confidential Sources. This means that I didn’t reveal to the public anything that was personal and confidential. It also follows rule 4.Intrusion into grief or shock. This doesn’t break rule 4 of Editors Code of Practice as I approached the interview with sympathy. I made sure none of the questions I asked made her feel uncomfortable, as before the interview I asked if she wanted to do it and gave the list of questions beforehand so she knew what she was answering. It also follows rule 3.Harassment. This is because I did not continually pursue them for an interview, I didn’t threaten them nor bribe them. I respected their decision, whether that was a no or yes. I did not intimidate them, I asked them in a friendly and calm manner when asking permission for an interview. It follows rule 12.Discrimination, because I did not make any racist or derogatory attitude towards the person I was interviewing. I didn’t ask nor give away any details about the individuals race, religion, colour etc. I had a friendly and welcoming attitude when interviewing them and I made sure they didn’t feel uncomfortable. However, this does break rule 6.Children. This breaks the rule as the person I was interviewing was under 16 and was unaccompanied by an adult. I did however, made sure that my teacher was aware that I was interviewing an under 16 person, therefore I did receive permission from an adult. I didn’t pay the person however, and I didn’t photograph or filmed them during school hours. I filmed them in their free time and when they were comfortable to.
In this part of the script, it follows rule 1. Accuracy in the Editors Code of practice. This follows the rule as I got my figures from reliable websites. The websites came from the government website and an anti bullying website, that specialises in cyber bullying. These websites are reliable because the government wouldn’t publish inaccurate information, as the public knows the government and expect them to publish accurate information. However, the information given could be out of date; not relevant to the time now. In the website it does’t give an exact date the figure were collected, which means the data could be out of date. And it’s not as accurate as it could be. From the anti bullying website, the data given is reliable because it’s from a company that specialises in cyber bullying, therefore you would expect the data given would be accurate. However, we don’t know who collected the data. We don’t know if researchers actually collected the data or if the website made it up, which means the data could be false.
This follows rule 9.Reporting crime. In the UK, it is argued that cyber bullying is a criminal offence as the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 and the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 fits into cyber bullying. Therefore there are some laws that are relevant to cyber bullying, even if it isn’t an established criminal offence in the UK. This follows rule 9 as I didn’t approach any family member or friends with the individual I was interviewing, nor did I try and bribe them to have an interview with them. This is because I didn’t think the friends or family of the individual were relevant to the story I was reporting about. My news article follows OFCOM’s rules for many reason. The first reason is that my news article does not contain any swear words or anything graphic that children shouldn’t be seeing. This means it will be scheduled before the Watershed, where most of news rounds are scheduled. Another rule that my news article follows is the rule about Under 18’s on TV. The person I interviewed was under 18, however I did receive permission form the appropriate party to use this person. Also in one of the sub clauses it states that I can use a person that is under 18 if it is relevant to my news article. The person I interviewed was relevant because my news article was aimed for young people and they could be able to relate to someone similar or close to their age.
List several ways that the article breaks or does not break the OFCOM Broadcasting Code Guidance (specifically: Sections 1,2,3,4,5,7 and 8) and explain why.
Section 1 Rule 1.4 Watershed: I feel that my article does follow this rule as it doesn't have or include any content that is deemed unsuitable for young children, therefore it can be aired before the water shed. I do not have any bad language, sexual content or violent/distrubibg content in my news article and i do not plan to add any of the following. This is because i feel that it is irrelevant to my news story and it would look professional. Because of this I am following OFCOMs protocol of the watershed and I feel that my news broadcast can be aired before the watershed no matter the time.
Section 2, 2.2 Factual programmes or items or portrayals of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience. In my opinion I feel that I am following this rule mainly because I have double checked all of my information and facts that I am using and making sure they are as accurate as they can be. I have made sure that all the facts and figures I am using are from professionals who know what they are talking about. Section 3, 3.1 Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services or BBC ODPS. I feel that my news story follows this rule mainly because it doesn't incite any crime or lead disorder. It is mainly very informative about cyber bullying and how it can be stopped, it doesn't use any words or sentences that can potentially lead to crime and violence.
Section 3, 3.3 Material which contains abusive or derogatory treatment of individuals, groups, religions or communities, must not be included in television and radio services or BBC ODPS except where it is justified by the context. I think that my news article follows this rule because it doesn't aim any derogatory information about a group of people. It is more on explain why people cyber bully and how they do it, therefore it can be aired. i haven't added in any communities or groups of people that aren't relevant to my news topic, and the groups I have included in my news article I haven't included any abusive or derogatory behaviour towards them
Section 5, 5.1 News, in whatever form, must be reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality. I think that my news article follows this rule mainly because I have fact checked all of my facts before the news broadcast was being filmed, to make sure that all the facts haven't changed or have been updated. I also feel that my news story isn't bias at all, it is very neutral about the topic. I feel that my news story is more factual and neutral, however because i am going to include an interview that has an individual that has been bullied it could be a bit bias. This is because the person being interviewed has a bias view of it and could portray cyber bullying as a crime.
Section 7, 7.4 If a contributor is under sixteen, consent should normally be obtained from a parent or guardian, or other person of eighteen or over in loco parentis. I dont think i have followed this rule because I didn't inform the parents of the individual I am interviewing and asked for their permission, therefore i have broken that rule. However, my teacher was aware that I was interviewing the individual and I did ask permsiosn of theindiviudl and they did agree. However, because they are a minor it means I wouldve had to ask permission from their parent or legal guardian which I didn't do, therefore breaking this rule.
Section 8, 8.7 If an individual or organisation’s privacy is being infringed, and they ask that the filming, recording or live broadcast be stopped, the broadcaster should do so, unless it is warranted to continue. I feel that I have followed this rule mainly because I made it clear to the individual to stop me at any time if they feel uncomfortable and that I would stop interviewing them. I also made sure that before the interview I ask questions that aren't very personal and I have sent the individual the list of questions so they know what they are being asked and they were aware of what was going on. Also, in the interview the individual didn't voice any discomfort and I didn't invade their privacy therefore the interview went along fine
List several ways that the article breaks or does not break the BBC Editorial Guidelines (specifically the Sections on Accuracy, Impartiality, Harm and Offence, Fairness, Privacy, Reporting Crime, Children and Young People as Contributors, Editorial Integrity) and explain why.
Section 3,3.1 Accuracy: Accuracy is not simply a matter of getting facts right. If an issue is controversial, relevant opinions as well as facts may need to be considered. When necessary, all the relevant facts and information should also be weighed to get at the truth. Where appropriate to the output, we should:
gather material using first hand sources wherever possible
check and cross check facts
validate the authenticity of documentary evidence and digital material
corroborate claims and allegations made by contributors wherever possible.
I feel that my article does not break the BBC's rule of accuracy mainly because I did make sure that all of my facts are crossed referenced and are as accurate as they can be. I did gather my material from first hand sources as I did interview a group/club that focuses on cyber bullying and they did give me some facts. I also made sure to check and cross check facts before saying them in the broadcast.
Section 5, Harm and Offence:When our content includes challenging material that risks offending some of our audience we must always be able to demonstrate a clear editorial purpose, taking account of generally accepted standards, and ensure it is clearly signposted. In my opinion, I think that i did not break this rule as I was very careful on the way i worded and structured my news broadcast. My news broadcast also didn't include things such as inappropriate language as I dint think it was necessary for the news article. My news article also didn't involve topics such as nudity and violence, as it was mainly more on online and the effects of social media.
Section 6, 6.1 Fairness, contributors and consent: The BBC strives to be fair to all - fair to those our output is about, fair to contributors, and fair to our audiences. BBC content should be based on respect, openness and straight dealing. I dont think I followed this rule, mainly because I didn't ask my contributors, such as the BBC and the anti bullying club if I could use their facts and figures. I also didn't give them any credit during my news broadcast when I included their information, therefor I don't think I was very fair to them.
Section 7, 7.1 Privacy: The BBC respects privacy and does not infringe it without good reason, wherever in the world it is operating. The Human Rights Act 1998 gives protection to the privacy of individuals, and private information about them, but balances that with a broadcaster's right to freedom of expression. I think I did follow this rule, mainly because when I was interviewing my individual I didn't ask very personal questions and I didn't make them answer any personal questions. I made sure that I didn't leak any private information of the individual or my crew, making them all sign a confidentially contract explaining what they can do and what I cant do.
Section 8, Reporting crime and anti social behaviour: Our coverage of crime and anti-social behaviour is part of the BBC's public purpose and is aimed at giving audiences the facts in their context. However, we must ensure that the public interest in our reporting is not outweighed by public concern about our methods. I feel that I did follow this rule as I was more on explain and informing the public about cyber bullying and I used the facts that were suitable to the context of my news topic. I also made sure that Was considering the publics interest, this is shown by when I was talking about moral panic in learning outcome 3 and was thinking of ways to not spread moral panic and cause the public distress.
Section 9, Children and young people as contributors: We must always safeguard the welfare of the children and young people who contribute to our content, wherever in the world we operate. This includes preserving their right to speak out and to participate, as enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. I think I broke this rule, mainly because i didn't ask the parents or legal guardians permission t film the minor I was interviewing. I didn't consider the parents concern, instead I just ask the minor themselves without confirming anything with the parent. Because of this I broke they rule, I also filmed the minor during school hours meaning there was a possibility that the minor could miss a couple of lessons because of the interview. However, this didn't happen as I filmed the minor during her lunch break, however there was a possibility that the interview could be ran over.
Section 14, 14.1 Editorial Integrity: The BBC's reputation, in the UK and around the world, is based on its editorial integrity and independence. Our audiences must be able to trust the BBC and be confident that our editorial decisions are not influenced by outside interests, political or commercial pressures, or any personal interests. I feel that I followed their rule as I made sure that the article was very neutral and more informative than bias. I made sure that the host didn't say any boas options and I made sure that the script didn't have any options that could sway the audience to think one way. I made sure that everything was factual and neutral, making sure that I didn't let the BBC or the anti bullying group add in their options or have any input in the news broadcast.