Murdoch Pay wall

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jQxGe_uDYgYDkZLo9Rc8FUgC6DAGsFoWt5qF_HVYdgQ/edit?usp=sharing

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1jQxGe_uDYgYDkZLo9Rc8FUgC6DAGsFoWt5qF_HVYdgQ/edit?usp=sharing




1) Do you agree with James Murdoch that the BBC should not be allowed to provide free news  ?

I believe everybody needs a free source of news so they could be informed and BBC has always been the free source to the people as we pay a TV licence fee and it wouldn't be right if BBC didn't provide free news as BBC Motto is to inform and educate and you cannot inform the people as most people won't pay for the paywall fee. I Don't agree with James as BBC don't take any advertising money and don't care high amount of the public's money as they get a licence fee and are a public broadcaster who mission is to inform and educate the people of the U.k and it wouldn't be right if they took more money of consumers 


2) Was Rupert Murdoch right to put his news content (The Times, The Sun) behind a paywall?

He does have a right to put a fee on his quality news because he needs to make money to pay for the journalists he employs and he has a right to have a paywall.  I believe he does have a right to put a cost to his news as he provides quality news to the public, however he will not make as much money because his competitors have provided free news to consumers and it will not work and be successful 

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/17/dapper-laughs-ofcom-launches-investigation-itv2



This article is about the internet sensation who had many complaints about his humour and his jokes. Dapper laughs started out on Vine and recently had his brand new contract terminated by ITV due to feminist jokes which haven't gone down well with the public.  This article is about how he got over 99 complaints which had started a investigation. 

• Rule 2.3 of the UK broadcasting code states that broadcasters must ensure that material that may cause offence is “justified by the context”
• Ofcom, which has received 99 complaints from viewers, has now launched an investigation to see if the content of the show is in breach of the UK broadcasting code.
• The last episode of the current series of the show premiered on 3 November and drew an average audience of 262,000.

In my opinion i believe that when you go onto TV your jokes could be taken far as you have a wider range audience and more people watch. I think he should've just done interviews and stayed on vine this wouldn't have happened if he didn't go on TV. 

News values

Immediacy- Before the digital revolution prior to this news was very slow to the public and very hard to spread due to lack of technology. News know is very easy to read as it spreads on digital media and new technology and its very easy to publish the news as before you had to use the papers to distribute news and rare news flashes.  This content spreads all over social networks and its very easy to read. 

Familiarity- Digital media has grown over the years and this has changed the familiarity of news. News that is know shown on TV is more international related as consumers we need to know about current affairs e.g. Palestine. We're used to getting world news these days as it's part of the news. 

Amplitude- This involves large amount of people. this is where messages can get across much easier over social media by posting real footage. This has biggest impact is on the people as they will have a better idea of the event via social media 

Frequency- This is when the event has happened recently. This has been affected by digital media as news could be updated frequently and people can discuss the story as soon as it happens. As soon as the event happens news outlets can report it via online because of the news revelation. 

unambiguity- this has been affected by personal opinions and people have different sources and believe different things you could also share your opinions via social media. 

Predictability- this is do we expect something to happen? this has been affected by social media as people predict something to happen and people expect some events. E.g. we could expect transfers to happen after speculation created on social media. 

Surprise- Is it a rare and unexpected? With new digital media nothing in the news could be unexpected as people gossip on social networks. According to Gultung and ruges unexpected news always becomes a big issue according to Gultung and Ruges theory and makes headlines but technology has made it an even bigger issue. 

continuity- Has this story been defined as news. This has been changed by new digital media as consumers can continue to talk and share about the latest news. You could repost whenever you want. 

Elite nations and people- If it is a big country such as America their news will be covered in the UK because is such a big country. If it was a smaller country the UK wont cover the news story. Bigger countries get more coverage as it concerns more people it will be all over the news. 

Negativity- Is it bad news? 
Most news covered is negative news as channels want attention and more viewers and their views and news gets spread on social media. 

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/nov/03/radio-1-launch-video-channel-bbc-iplayer



This article is about how radio station radio 1 will have their own iplayer channel which will provide music and documentaries as they want to battle the you tube generation and domination. The channel will be putting 2 pieces of content everyday and this will always be updated. 

• The station will put up to two programmes a day on the iPlayer channel, which is intended to reverse a decline in listening among its target audience of 15 to 29-year-olds and use it as a “gateway” to introduce younger people to other BBC content.
• The new service, which will feature Radio 1’s Live Lounge and live streaming from events such as its Big Weekend concerts and Teen Awards, is expected to generate an extra 310,000 hours of viewing per month.

I think that this will be a good idea as they are keeping up to date as they will be giving new content everyday and they will keep up with their competitors. 

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/nov/20/itv-bbc-bid-premier-league-rights




This article is about how ITV are preparing to buy the premier league highlight rights from rivals BBC. This article states that ofcom are investigating the premier league rights and the rights could be sold to the highest bidder.  The last time ITV held the rights was in 2004 but BBC did buy them back from ITV. Last time ITV had the rights they failed to meet customer demands and were sold straight back to BBC as consumers didn't like the 7 pm show.

• The commercial broadcaster, which last held the rights between 2001 and 2004 when it poached Des Lynam and introduced Andy Townsend’s ill-fated Tactics Truck, is expected to put together a bid once the tender process gets under way early next year.
• The BBC paid £60m per year to retain the rights under the current deal, which runs to the end of next season. That helped the Premier League to a record £5.5bn in broadcasting income over three years, fuelled by a bidding war between BT Sport and Sky that boosted the income from its domestic rights by 70% to £3bn.
•  Next season ITV will lose the rights to live Champions League football after BT Sport spent £897m on an exclusive deal with Uefa.

In my opinion I will hate it if the rights are sold to ITV as I don't like the presenter and I don't like the continues breaks that they have. I really like Gary linekar and the Analysis BBC do which is miles ahead of BBC.   

Build the wall analysis

Section 1: The first section is about how he believes that the audience should pay traditional and quality journalism all the time and not get it for free. 
Section 2: The second section is about how he thinks that the media giants need to step in to change the whole set up, where professional news inst reported by citizen journalist and by qualified journalists. 
Section 3: The third section is about how they ignored the development of new media and it was only recognised when the damage was done. 
Section 4: This section he talks about 3 different things, the first is the pay wall and how audience will pay for the quality news, then he talks about the local newspapers and if they provided quality news then people will be willing to pay for quality journalism. 

My opinion is quite similar to the writer as I have always said people are in a habit to get free quality news as they never noticed the problem when it actually started so people aren't willing to pay for news monthly as its free online and this wasn't diagnosed when first happened. I believe if every industry introduced pay walls then people will be willing to pay for the news and this way more journalist will be employed which will lead to more quality news. 

"You must both also individually inform the wire-service consortiums that unless they limit membership to publications, online or off, that provide content only through paid subscriptions, you intend to withdraw immediately from those consortiums."
So wire services would no longer be allowed to provide content to TV and radio stations?

#1 Posted by Max Brantley on Thu 16 Jul 2009 at 10:30 AM

will never pay for “news” again. Most news is not truly news - it is sensationalism, hype and deception. Most news is not balanced - every editor is biased. And it is not just that - I truly can not afford to pay for news. Academics, especially with tenure, got it made in the shade and may be able to afford to follow the “news” as they are funded and it does not come out of their pockets. The question comes down to this - do we want an informed public or not. The answer, at least right now, is no. If the public were truly properly informed the American people would not allow Wall Street to gut Main Street, would not believe the lies of “the terrorists are going to destroy our way of life” and would understand that it really makes no difference - except in perception - of who holds the title of chief cheerleader - oops I mean Commander in Chief, President, which should be renamed CEO of America Incorporated.

#9 Posted by Lawrence Turner on Fri 17 Jul 2009 at 11:55 AM

If news were not free, there would be enough people willing to pay for it to cover the cost of producing it. But suppose the New York Times suddenly started charging for online access; althought it is a great newspaper, I probably wouldn't pay for it. There are just too many free alternatives that are almost as good. Even if (for example) no other online news source were as good as the Times, the remaining news sources will collectively fill the gap. 
The economic parlance, you have goods which are near perfect substitutes. If I can't read Paul Krugman's column, I can go read some other noble prize winning economist's latest available(and accessible) column. Likewise, if I can't read Thomas Freidman, I can get the same kind of hype from a used car lot advertisement.
So I think, maybe, a number of major papers would have to work in concert to significantly degrade the free online news world. In other words - again in economic parlance - they might have to collude.
The news industry needs something like OPEC.

#13 Posted by Raskalnikov on Fri 17 Jul 2009 at 10:22 PM

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/11/spotify-ceo-taylor-swift-albums-daniel-ek


This article is about the recent removal of Taylor swifts music on the mobile streaming app spotify. This happened as Taylor swift and her record label weren't happy with free streaming at the star where people could listen to her music for free for a whole month. Taylor Swift doesn't like this idea and removed all her music on spotify. 

• Spotify has paid 2bn dollars to the music record labels
• spotify has 50 million active users that stream their music. 
• 13 million of them subscribers paying a monthly fee
• 80 per cent of their subscribers started of with the free trial. 

I'm stuck in the middle of this as I have valid opinions for this current situation. One side is that supporters of the musician should buy the singers album and all the songs to support them if they didn't they wouldn't be a music industry as people download songs and musicians charge a massive fee for tours. However I think SPotify is a great service and most users will end up staying on their and this is money lost for Taylor Swifts record label and herself. 

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/nov/13/google-nexus-6-phone-review-roundup-massive-fast-pricey


This article is about the new Google phone which has recently just come out to the biggest stores in the country. This article is about how people who have brought the phone have had different views and there are mixed feelings about this phone some hate the phone and some people adore the recent phone.  Google are known to having the cheap phone which is the cheaper option however with this you cannot use that term as this phones starts at the price of 499 and the nexus 5 was at a cheap price of 200.  This phone is only on sale in America and supply chains are delaying it for UK release. 

• The nexus 5 price was very cheap and started at 200 pounds however this phone starts at 500 pounds which is unusual from Google 
• This is a big phone as the screen size is 6 inch and that is as big as the samsung note 2 

In my opinion i believe that Google are in their own right to sell this phone at this price, as this phone is as good as its competitors and it shouldn't be a problem if they have a good marketing formula like Apple as this phone is as good as the Iphone 6 as the features are slightly better, but in apples advantage the Iphone is way easier to use.  

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/oct/28/youtube-mobile-viewing-subscriptions-susan-wojcicki


This article is about how YouTube are saying how the audience will not want to see adverts before watching their YouTube video. They also state that they will have to change this and might introduce subscription, although this didn't work in 2013. They state that most views are coming from mobile devices and people are getting frustrated with the adverts. The CEO states that she doesn't want to see adverts. 

• She state's she really likes subscription model 
• Watch time is growing and risen by 50 per cent 
• YouTube have over billion users. 

If YouTube introduce the subscription model they user will drop as YouTube will not be a free service like it is know. I believe that the Adverts aren't that bad as they have the option too skip the adverts 

Facebook

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/oct/22/facebook-uk-corporation-tax



This article is about how The massive social media society Facebook don't pay any UK cooperation tax. Facebook is the biggest social media company and most shareholders are from the UK and They pay out shares without any tax and this money is being distributed to people in the UK 

• Facebook made 371 million from advertising last year
• UK Staff received 1.52 free shares worth 118 million dollars
• UK revenue rose to 47 million within a year 
• 2.2 million shares weren't paid out 

I believe that Facebook U.K Must pay U.K tax as everybody earning money have to give give a percentage back to the U.K and Facebook isn't a exception as they are a normal business and I believe that they must get a penalty and serve the consequences.