Evaluation

For me, studying the path of a news story was probably the most interesting.  Not just writing the essay, but the blog posts and work leading up to it was useful as well.  I found that I really learned something in doing all of this.  It engaged me and I felt compelled to read countless articles with a new perspective.  I feel that in the future, while reading articles, I will think about where they originated.  It will be interesting to think about the path that the stories went on and how they morphed.  This way of thinking will lead me to improve my own writing.  I will think about Harris's points on forwarding and countering as I write papers in the future.

Final Draft Second Essay: Leveson Inquiry

Zach Quinn

Professor Eric Leake

Writing 1122

27 February 2012

Essay 2: Following a News Story

Rupert Murdoch developed his company, News Corporation, to make it one of the largest media corporations in the world.  The economist describes him as being the inventor of the modern tabloid and the last media mogul.  Lately, however, the press has not shed a warm light upon him.  The modern tabloid he invented took its work a little too far.  News of the World, a British tabloid, faced allegations of hacking voicemails messages.  Its sister newspaper, the Sun, faces current investigation of bribing public officials.  Though this investigation, the Leveson Inquiry, started years ago, I will be discussing how recent news about it has spread.  Today, Sue Akers testified at the Leveson Inquiry.  Her statements addressed how employees at the Sun engaged in paying off policemen and other public officials.  I will take a look at how British news sources, American news sources, the blogosphere and twitter interact.

This news story came to my attention via the New York Times.  It would be ignorant to think, however, that the NYT was the first and last source of this information.  It’s quite the contrary as the NYT isn’t even the main source covering this story.  We must start at a website titled, “The Leveson Inquiry: Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press.”  This website states that it, “aims to provide the latest information on the Inquiry, including details of hearings and evidence, to the public and interested parties” (Leveson Inquiry). Here we find daily transcripts and video footage from the hearings themselves.  This information can be described as a primary source.  Perspective spins have not been placed on these sources yet and quotations are in their original context.  From viewing the video we hear the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Sue Akers say, “There also appears to have been a culture at the Sun of illegal payments and systems have been created to facilitate those payments whilst hiding the identities of officials receiving the money” (Toker).  This information can also be accessed in transcript form on the website.  Question and answer portions are also available where we can read Sue Akers respond to counsel members.  The senior counsel for the inquiry asks, “In your own word, what has happened to that line of enquiry?”  Akers responds, “We’ve identified a number of ex-senior managers who were – and indeed arrested them – for authorizing or facilitating the payments, but we haven’t yet identified the police officers” (Toker).  Here, Akers is commenting on the arrests made of managers at the Sun but also says that they have yet to find out who the police officers were that received the payments.  This is important factual information, especially good for finding quotes for news articles.  The audience addressed includes the public and the media who might be looking for information for their articles.

Moving from the primary source to news organizations we must first consider Britain’s newspapers and media sources.  The Guardian, a British Paper, reposts a part of the video from today’s hearing on its website.  The video is headed with a paragraph explaining it:

Met deputy assistant commissioner Sue Akers tells the Leveson inquiry there was ‘a culture at the Sun of illegal payments'. She also tells the inquiry of emails indicating multiple payments made to individuals amounting to thousands of pounds. In addition, she confirms that a system was implemented to hide the identities of those receiving payments. (Sue Akers tells)

In this summary we begin to see some reformatting of quotations.  There doesn’t seem to be an obvious bias in this paragraph, however.  It is left to the viewer of the video to watch Sue Akers main point about what corruption went on at the Sun.  There could be some bias in that they didn’t put a part of the video up with opposing council speaking.  This is only one part of the Guardian’s coverage of this story.  The Guardian dedicates an entire page to the Leveson Inquiry.  As we just discussed there is a latest video section.  There is a Live blog, a Latest Video, a Top stories, an Interactive guide section and many others.  These resources contain all of the information about the hearings, witness statements, latest news on events surrounding the inquiry, and analysis of statements made by those involved.  If one wanted a complete work up of the inquiry along with analysis, the Guardian’s website would be the place to go.

            Venturing away from the Guardian and onto the BBC, we also find that today’s news story about the Inquiry is on the main page.  In addition, upon searching on the site, there is a question and answer part, which tells readers about the basic information surrounding the trial.  One question, what is the Leveson Inquiry?, is responded to with:

The inquiry is into the culture, practice and ethics of the press.  Prime Minister David Cameron set up the inquiry after the News of the World admitted intercepting voicemail messages of prominent people to find stories.  (Leveson Inquiry: Met)

This page seems important for readers that don’t have much background information on the current news stories and want to learn more.  The BBC links to another page, Democracy Live, an affiliate news organization.  It contains videos of statements made by those involved such as key witnesses.  The BBC’s main news on the hearing of the 27^th is an article formed much more like a secondary source rather than links and videos of primary sources.  The left-hand column of the article is a rephrasing of Sue Akers testimony while the right-hand side is an analysis by BBC news journalist Peter Hunt.  Hunt writes, “Only yesterday, Rupert Murdoch launched his latest product, the Sun on Sunday.  Now his company is digesting the sobering testimony about alleged illegal activity at his cherished tabloid” (Hunt).  This analysis is essential as we are getting into opinionated versions of the news.  The audience here is those that believe all of the accusations are true.

It is important now to cross the Atlantic in analyzing this news story.  Inside the U.S., the Huffington Post is viewed as a liberal news organization.  Regardless, it’s a recognized source for news and in publishing a story about the UK should have no bias.  As well, interestingly enough, the Huffington Post has a separate United Kingdom Edition.  On the U.S. version, the article on the hearings is titled, “Leveson Inquiry: 'Culture Of Illegal Payments' At The Sun; Rebekah Brooks Tipped Off About Extent Of Hacking Probe” (AP).  The UK version on the other hand has a similar article titled, “Leveson Inquiry: Sue Akers Reveals £80k Payments Were Part Of 'Culture Of Illegal Payments' At The Sun” (Rickman).  The difference in titles is interesting, considering that their contents are much the same.  The audience that the UK article is addressing probably has much more background information on the story.  This leaves them to address the issue more specifically in their title.  It is also important to note that the Associated Press wrote the U.S. article while an author, Dina Rickman, wrote the UK article.  The Huffington Post does an interesting thing in providing a timeline at the bottom of the article that catalogues the major events in the Inquiry.  This provides an easy way of getting into the background information and other events having to do with the current article.

The article posted by The New York Times must now be considered.  The article, located on the homepage of the Times, is titled, “Inquiry Leader Says Murdoch Papers Paid Off British Officials” (Lyall).  Up until this point, Rupert Murdoch’s name barely came up, especially in a title.  Most of the British newspapers focused on Murdoch’s companies and used names of those involved in the inquiry.  It is interesting to note that the perspective provided by the Times is the first one to target Murdoch himself.  The audience they’re targeting is far more liberal than the audiences targeted by other news organizations.  In looking at the paper that provides what generally is the opposite perspective of the NYT, we turn to the Wall Street Journal.  Without a subscription, I cannot access more than the first two paragraphs.  However, we can see the obvious differences even in just the title.  The WSJ’s article is titled, “Sun accused of Culture of Illegal Payments.” (Bryan-Low).  The article goes on to say, “The U.K. police official leading criminal probes into alleged wrongdoing at News Corp.'s U.K. newspaper operations said that the company's tabloid, the Sun, had a ‘culture…of illegal payments’ by journalists to a wide array of public officials” (Bryan-Low).  This perspective has left out Murdoch’s involvement completely and took on a tone using words like ‘alleged.’  This targets a much more conservative audience. 

Out of curiosity I wanted to know how Murdoch run news organizations reported on their affiliates.  Upon searching Fox News’s website, the latest article having to do with the story was written on the 26^th.  It is titled, “Rupert Murdoch Oversees First Edition Of 'Sun On Sunday' –BBC” (Rupert Murdoch Oversees).  This article only contains information on Murdoch’s launch of his new tabloid.  Even upon looking at the Economist, I found it to contain no article on the story of the inquiry.  The only article they had was from the 25^th and contained the same information as the Fox News article.  CNN had also not touched on this news story.

As we approach what for now has been the life of this story, we must take a look at what is feeding on twitter.  British actress Susan Penhaligon and actor Daniel Brocklebank both commented on the inquiry.  This is where we begin to get opinionated comments on the story.  Penhaligon writes, “They went too far, those tabloid Sun writers, too far. It says much for British morality that we say, enough is enough #levesoninquiry” (Penhaligon).  Jim Old, a field producer for Sky News, which is also owned by Murdoch, spent the day commenting on the hearings.  His tweets included statements such as, “Lord Prescott's evidence is drawing to a close. The shorthand writer looks like she needs a drink. #LevesonInquiry” (Old).  Other less reputable tweeters wrote tweets such as, “Time to close Murdoch's empire totally, and replace the corrupt met #levesoninquiry.”  Such perspectives and comments are interesting to see on a news story.

From starting at primary sources such as videos from the hearing and transcripts of statements, this news story morphed itself greatly.  Media sources such as the BBC and the Guardian provided background information and other valuable links.  The Huffington Post, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal all placed their perspectives on the story.  Those owned by Murdoch’s parent company, News Corp, have largely avoided this story thus far and will probably continue to.  Lastly, important, as well as non-influential people, have their ways of getting their own opinions out there.  Twitter provides the route for those to express their perspectives, biased or unbiased.  News stories today do not go from source to journalist and then straight to the reader.  The life of this story exemplified Jeff Jarvis’s Press Sphere perfectly.  Readers were both writers and sources.  Perspectives came from many different places.

Works Cited

AP, and Meera Selva. “Leveson Inquiry: ‘Culture Of Illegal Payments’ At The Sun; Rebekah Brooks Tipped Off About Extent Of Hacking Probe.” The Huffington Post: UK. HuffPost News, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/‌2012/‌02/‌27/‌leveson-the-sun-illegal-payments-rebekah-brooks-hacking_n_1303432.html#s440748&title=July_8_2011>.

Bryan-Low, Cassell, and Paul Sonne. “U.K. Sun Accused of Bribe ‘Culture.’” The Wall Street Journal. Dow Jones and Company, 28 Feb. 2012. Web. 28 Feb. 2012. <http://online.wsj.com/‌article/‌SB10001424052970203833004577249020401504112.html?KEYWORDS=leveson+inquiry>.

Hunt, Peter. “Analysis of Leveson Inquiry: Met ‘assured Brooks over hacking inquiry.’” BBC News UK. BBC, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/‌news/‌uk-17183175>.

“Leveson Inquiry: Met ‘assured Brooks over hacking inquiry.’” BBC News UK. BBC, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/‌news/‌uk-17183175>.

Lyall, Sarah. “A Fresh Blot on Murdoch’s Sun.” The New York Times: Europe. The New York Times, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.nytimes.com/‌2012/‌02/‌28/‌world/‌europe/‌murdoch-hacking-inquiry-expands-to-uk-officials.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&hp>.

Old, Jim. Field producer for Sky News and dedicated crasher of mountain bikes. I won't be held responsible for my spelling. London. February 27, 2012.

Penhaligon, Susan. Twitter Account: Actress, Writer, Boat Dweller, Cornishwoman.

February 27, 2012.

Rickman, Dina. “Leveson Inquiry: Sue Akers Reveals £80k Payments Were Part Of ‘Culture Of Illegal Payments’ At The Sun.” The Huffington Post: UK. HuffPost News, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/‌2012/‌02/‌27/‌sue-akers-leveson-inquiry-illegal-payments_n_1303475.html>.

“Rupert Murdoch Oversees First Edition Of ‘Sun On Sunday’ -BBC.” Fox Business: The Power to Prosper. Fox News Network, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.foxbusiness.com/‌news/‌2012/‌02/‌26/‌rupert-murdoch-oversees-first-edition-sun-on-sunday-bbc/>.

“Sue Akers tells Leveson of ‘culture of illegal payments’ at the Sun - video.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited, 27 Feb. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.guardian.co.uk/‌media/‌video/‌2012/‌feb/‌27/‌leveson-inquiry-sue-akers-sun-media-video>.

Toker, John. “Evidence.” Leveson Inquiry: Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press. The Leveson Inquiry, Mar. 2012. Web. 27 Feb. 2012. <http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/‌evidence/‌?witness=dac-sue-akers>.

Essay #2: UK to US News

Zach Quinn

Professor Eric Leake

Writing 1122

27 February 2012

Essay 2: Following a News Story

Rupert Murdoch developed his company, News Corporation, to make it one of the largest media corporations in the world.  The economist describes him as being the inventor of the modern tabloid and the last media mogul. (Economist) Lately however, the press that Murdoch doesn’t control has not shed upon him a warm light.  It appears that the modern tabloid he invented, took its work a little too far.  Specifically News of the World, a British tabloid, faced allegations of hacking voicemails messages.  In addition, its sister newspaper, the Sun faces current investigation of bribing public officials.  Though this investigation, the Leveson Inquiry, started years ago, I will be discussing how recent news about it has spread.  It will be interesting too look at how British news sources, American news sources the blogosphere and twitter interact.

This news story came to my attention via the New York Times, which I read frequently.  It would be ignorant to think however that the NYT was the first and last source of this information.  Quite the contrary as the Times isn’t even the main source covering this story.  We must start at The Leveson Inquiry: Culture, Practice and Ethics of the Press, a website that has been developed that “aims to provide the latest information on the Inquiry, including details of hearings and evidence, to the public and interested parties.” (Leveson Inquiry) Here we find daily transcripts and video footage from the hearings themselves.  This information is the primary source of this news.  Perspective spins have not been placed on these sources yet and quotations are in their original context.  From viewing the video we hear the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Sue Akers say, “There also appears to have been a culture at the Sun of illegal payments and systems have been created to facilitate those payments whilst hiding the identities of officials receiving the money.” (Leveson Inquiry)  This information can also be accessed in transcript form on the website.  Question and answer portions are also available where we can read Sue Akers respond to counsel members.  The senior counsel for the inquiry, which means the prosecutor asks, “In your own word, what has happened to that line of enquiry?”  Akers responds, “We’ve identified a number of ex-senior managers who were – and indeed arrested them – for authorizing or facilitating the payments, but we haven’t yet identified the police officers.”  (Leveson transcript) Her Akers is commenting on the arrests made of managers at the Sun but also says that they have yet to find out who the police officers were that received the payments.

Moving from the primary source on to other news organizations we must first consider Britain’s newspapers and media sources.  The Guardian, a British Paper, reposts a part of the video from today’s hearing on its website.  The video is headed with a paragraph explaining it:

Met deputy assistant commissioner Sue Akers tells the Leveson inquiry there was ‘a culture at the Sun of illegal payments'. She also tells the inquiry of emails indicating multiple payments made to individuals amounting to thousands of pounds. In addition, she confirms that a system was implemented to hide the identities of those receiving payments. (Guardian)

In this summary we begin to see some reformatting of quotations.  There doesn’t seem to be an obvious bias in this paragraph, however.  It is left to the viewer of the video to watch Sue Akers main point about what corruption went on at the Sun.  This is only one part of the Guardian’s coverage of this story.  The Guardian dedicates an entire page to the Leveson Inquiry.  As we just discussed there is a latest video section.  In addition there is a Live blog, a Top stories, an Interactive guide section and many others.  These resources contain all of the information about the hearings, witness statements, latest news on events surrounding but not inside the inquiry, and analysis of statements made by those involved.  If one wanted a complete work up of the inquiry along with analysis, the Guardian’s website would be the place to go.

            Venturing away from the Guardian and onto the BBC, we also find that today’s news story about the Inquiry is on the main page.  In addition, upon searching on the site, there is a question and answer part, which tells readers about the basic information surrounding the trial.  One question, what is the Leveson Inquiry, is responded to with:

The inquiry is into the culture, practice and ethics of the press.  Prime Minister David Cameron set up the inquiry after the News of the World admitted intercepting voicemail messages of prominent people to find stories.  (BBC)

This page seems important for readers that don’t have much background information on the current news stories and want to learn more.  The BBC also links to another page, Democracy Live, which seems to be an affiliate news organization.  It contains videos of statements made by those involved such as key witnesses.  Moving on to the BBC’s main news on the hearing on the 27^th, we find an article formed much more like a secondary source rather than links and videos of primary sources.  The left-hand column of the article is a rephrasing of Sue Akers testimony while the right-hand side is an analysis by BBC news journalist Peter Hunt.  Hunt writes, “Only yesterday, Rupert Murdoch launched his latest product, the Sun on Sunday.  Now his company is digesting the sobering testimony about alleged illegal activity at his cherished tabloid.”  (BBC) This analysis is essential as we are getting into opinionated versions of the news.

It is important now to cross the Atlantic in analyzing this news story.  Inside the U.S. the Huffington Post is viewed as a liberal news organization.  Regardless, it’s a recognized source for news and in publishing a story about the UK should have no bias.  As well, interestingly enough, the Huffington Post has a separate United Kingdom Edition.  On the U.S. version, the article on the hearings is titled, “Leveson Inquiry: 'Culture Of Illegal Payments' At The Sun; Rebekah Brooks Tipped Off About Extent Of Hacking Probe.” (Huff Post)  The UK version on the other hand has a similar article titled, “Leveson Inquiry: Sue Akers Reveals £80k Payments Were Part Of 'Culture Of Illegal Payments' At The Sun.” (HuffPostUK)  The difference in titles is interesting, considering that their contents are much the same.  It is also important to note that the Associated Press wrote the U.S. article while an author, Dina Rickman, wrote the UK article.  The Huffington Post does an interesting thing in providing a timeline at the bottom of the article that catalogues the major events in the Inquiry.  This provides an easy way of getting into the background information and other past events having to do with the current article.

Back to where I started with this news story we must look at the New York Times.  The article, posted on the homepage of the Times, is titled, “Inquiry Leader Says Murdoch Papers Paid Off British Officials.” (NYT)  Up until this point, Rupert Murdoch’s name hardly came up, especially in a title.  Most of the British newspapers focused on Murdoch’s companies and used names of those involved in the inquiry.  It is interesting to note that the perspective provided by the Times is the first one to target Murdoch himself.  In looking at the paper that provides what generally is the opposite perspective of the NYT, we turn to the Wall Street Journal.  Without a subscription, I cannot access more than the first two paragraphs.  However, we can see the obvious differences even in just the title.  The WSJ’s article is titled, “Sun accused of Culture of Illegal Payments.”  (WSJ)  The article goes on to say, “The U.K. police official leading criminal probes into alleged wrongdoing at News Corp.'s U.K. newspaper operations said that the company's tabloid, the Sun, had a "culture…of illegal payments" by journalists to a wide array of public officials.”  (WSJ) This perspective has left out Murdoch’s involvement completely and took on a tone using words like ‘alleged.’

Out of curiosity I wanted to know how Murdoch run news organizations reported on their affiliates.  Upon searching Fox News’s website, the latest article having to do with the story was written on the 26^th.  It is titled Rupert Murdoch Oversees First Edition Of 'Sun On Sunday' –BBC.  This article only contains information on Murdoch’s launch of his new tabloid.  Even upon looking at the Economist, I found it to contain no new article on the story.  The only article they had was from the 25^th and contained only the information of the Fox News article.  CNN had also not touched on this new story.

As we approach what for now has been the life of this story, we must take a look at what is feeding on twitter.  British actress Susan Penhaligon and actor Daniel Brocklebank both commented on the inquiry.  This is where we begin to get opinionated comments on the story.  Penhaligon writes, “They went too far, those tabloid Sun writers, too far. It says much for British morality that we say, enough is enough #levesoninquiry.”  Jim Old, a field producer for Sky News, which is also owned by Murdoch, spent the day commenting on the hearings.  His tweets included things like “Lord Prescott's evidence is drawing to a close. The shorthand writer looks like she needs a drink. #LevesonInquiry.”  Other less reputable tweeters wrote tweets such as, “Time to close Murdoch's empire totally, and replace the corrupt met #levesoninquiry.”  Such perspectives and comments are interesting to see on a news story.

From starting at primary sources such as videos from the hearing and transcripts of statements, this news story morphed itself greatly.  Media sources such as the BBC and the Guardian provided background information and other valuable links.  The Huffington Post, the New York Times, and the Wall Street Journal all placed their perspectives on the story.  Those owned by Murdoch’s parent company, News Corp, have largely avoided this story thus far and will probably continue to.  Lastly, important as well as non-influential people have their ways of getting their own opinions out there.  Twitter provides the route for those to express their perspectives, biased or unbiased.  News stories today do not go from source to journalist and then straight to the reader.  The life of this story exemplified Jeff Jarvis’s Press Sphere perfectly.  Readers were writers and sources as well as perspectives came from many different places.

Taking and Approach

Taking an approach was more complicated than forwarding, countering, and coming to terms.  It took reading over the section in depth rather than skimming it to understand what Harris was saying.  From my understanding, I would explain taking an approach as looking at a writers concerns and broad views and understanding their approach, then using that to make your own approach.  This is different from forwarding and countering in that you don’t use phrases, single points or sentences from other writers.  Instead of commenting on the specifics, you comment on their overall views and broad points and make your own opinions known.  Harris describes that there are three strategies in taking an approach.  The three are acknowledging influences, turning an approach on itself, and reflexivity.  He says that its important to note those writers who provided the template or model for your writing, that you should ask the same questions of a writer that he or she asks of others and you should note key choices you made in constructing your text.  In the New York Times, if I understand “taking an approach correctly,” I would say that many journalists use the approaches of politician’s beliefs to make their own approaches.  This occurred in one article on the rising gas prices that I was reading.  This might not have been what Harris was talking about in this chapter but it was the closest thing to it that I could find in the Times.  The author, Helene Cooper, took the approaches of politicians on the news surrounding oil prices rising.  She used this information to forward her own opinion onto it.

Revision

Forwarding:

In looking back in retrospect at my goals, it seems I have completed the main one.  I aimed at regaining my interest in the New York Times.  At the conclusion of this course, I can without doubt say that I have accomplished that.  I no longer click straight to facebook or collegehumor off of my homepage.  My homepage being the times, I take some time to figure out what has been happening in current events.  It was not a problem that I didn’t have a subscription for the online NYT.  The amount I read in a day doesn’t hit the cap very often and I am left to freely read.  In doing my reading I found myself thinking of questions about background material and other information relating to the article.  With all of the work that we have done with the press sphere and the life of news stories, I am able to easily find this information.

This revision adds to the last post by providing a new perspective that I didn’t have when I wrote it the first time.  Forwarding my ideas from last time and contributing my new perspectives, provides a new take on the way I interact with the times.

Original Post:

I've been quite used to reading the New York Times for a while now.  As I described in earlier posts, though I took a break from it last quarter, I did read it throughout most of high school.  The NYT is one of the most respected and influential news sources in the world, if not the most.  Even facing a society drifting away from print news sources, the NYT found a way to survive.  It revamped its business plan, putting all of its news online and beginning to cap the articles that you can read.  To access more than the headlines and a few articles, you now have to pay the subscription fee. 

The stories that I remember reading most were ones about the current political environment and the republican primaries.  These seemed the most important to the day’s events.  Most of my reading went off of the home page, without venturing to the different sections of the world news.  In doing this I'm sure I missed interesting stories that for whatever reason didn't make the headlines.

What the New York Times does that I love is in articles it links to opinion pages and other interesting stories.  After skimming an article I can read related articles.  This leads me to read the different perspectives on an event as well as background information that I otherwise wouldn't have been exposed to.