Watsonian Institute
Anulos qui animum ostendunt omnes gestemus!
- Joined
- May 20, 2012
- Messages
- 197
- Reaction score
- 0
In a earlier thread, someone (perhaps factfinda?) mentioned a media law expert's take on the publication of details of cases such as this in both professional media and forums like this one. From memory, I think it was in the context of a longer discussion regarding defamation.
I have been thinking about this and wonder if the media's handling of the reporting of this investigation could also have anything to do with the fallout from the Finkelstein Report earlier this year. Not as a direct result, but as a broader approach to the way they handle news. Given the media has been *very* straight in their reporting of this case, I wondered whether, other than their usual practices of being accurate and needing to keep their contacts intact, perhaps there was also some discussion in media management about the ramifications of looser reporting, since the ink hasn't really dried on the Finkelstein Report.
I'm not suggesting individual reporters are gun-shy or quaking in their boots on the tail of this report (far from it), but that, overall, the media might be considering their approach in stories such as this. I find it fascinating that no one in the media has done the bolt yet.
Not quoting myself ; just posting a link to the report for those who might be interested. http://www.dbcde.gov.au/digital_economy/independent_media_inquiry
You also might be interested in the media's reaction to it (which I'm pondering, as per my post above).
Here is News Ltd: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/med...ias-great-divide/story-e6frg996-1226295437607
Here is Fairfax: http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/finkelstein-gets-a-bad-press-20120313-1uyac.html
Would love to know what others might think in relation to this particular case.