HCJ Test Revision Notes

Here's a simple break down of the answers to the questions. You may need to elaborate more, these are only bullet points but they may be helpful reminders in the exam.

1. Outline the verification principles as part of the school of thought known as logical positivism. Hoe might this principle be applied in the day-to-day work of a journalist?

-The verification principle is a way of categorising truth claims as: true, false or meaningless.
-If a claim can not be proven to be true or false then it is regarded as meaningless and should not be spoken about, because it can not be proven in any way.
-This relates to journalists because we need to make sure that everything we print or broadcast is fast, accurate and fair. Our articles or packages would not be accurate if we cant verify them as true or false. If they are not verifiable than there is no reason to talk about it as it must be meaningless.
-Religious and Cartesian people do not believe in this as God can not be verified to be true or false, therefore he is meaningless and should not be spoken about.
- Logical positivism is believed in by the Vienna Circle who were a group of philosophers who greatly influenced 20th century philosophy.
-Logical positivism questioned the validity of other philiosophical schools of thought such as metaphysics.
- Modern philosophy combines empirical knowledge with the deduction of human knowledge.

2. What is phenomenology: can there be such a thing as a subjective reality or subjective truth? What sort of standards ought a journalist apply?

-Phemonmenology is a branch of philosophy that deals with the subjective experience and your own personal reason of how and why you react that way.
-Solipsism- The world is a projection of your own being.
-Truth can be subjective - it is what you want to believe.
- Impircists Locke and Berkley believe that there is no way you can believe the door is there without thinking about it.
- It is a crazy idea but proved by quantum mechanics.
- The mind builds the data on the 5 senses.
- HUSSERL - Intention > if you want to see a tree you will see a tree. You WILL the world in to existence.
-HEIDEGGER > Phenomenologist, after the war he was concerned with our intentions that make the world then dealing with the consequences of those choices.

3. Describe in broad terms Keynes ideas on monetary policy, with an indication of how Keynesian “revolution” came about. Does “Keynesianism” inevitably lead to social regression, mortal failure, and serfdom as Hayek asserts?

-Check out Charlotte Clarks blog for a catchy rap that really helped me out on this question.http://charlotteaclarke.blogspot.com
-KEYNES, BOOST AGGREGATE DEMAND TO GET OUT OF UNEMPLOYMENT.
- K wants to steer markets, the circular flow when people are earning and then spending back out in to the economy.
- K if the markets are low we need to increase government spending.
- K believes that wars boost the economy because virtually everyone is employed.
- K State intervention can counter depression.
-K wanted to print more money which then resulted in more employment and good circulation.
-K believed you could pay people money even if the gold was not in the bank. The people would spend their money on rent, food etc and so the money would find it's way back out in to the economy making more jobs for people and allowing people to actually sell their wares. If people invested it like HAYEK wanted the money would not be circulating.
-K is the economist that theorised price controld by the governments central bank. Lower the interest rates when the economy is doing well and raise the interest rates when the economy is falling and slipping in to a depression or recession. This will mean that people will not be saving when there is a recession they will be spending the money and circulating the money.
- K argued the wages should not be cut because if they were there would be less spending and less money circulating the economy.
- HAYEK wrote the road to serfdom and argued that if the government take control of economic decision making then there will be an abandonment of individualism, liberalism and freedom resulting in a socialist or fascist oppression with serfs working for the State.
- H wants the markets set free.
- H believes KEYNES theory conceals the mechanics of change and is a simple quick fix solution.
- H says that we are only left with debt after circulating the market and believes we should save our money and let it grow in the banks. The market coordinates time with interest.
- H - MALINVESTMENTS WRECK THE ECONOMY and the boom devalues capital.
- Employment is a means but not an end to a recession or depression.

4. “Facts in logical space are the world” Witgenstein in Tractatus .Do you agree?

- It is a declaritive statment which is meant to be self evident.
-A fect is something that can be independently verified as true, false or meaningless.
- In the critque of pure reason Kant explains that what we experience physically is not the real world but a replica made with our brains.
-The brain consists of thoguhts which is close to the world being made up of facts
- Kants 'brain' could be Wittgensteins 'logical space'.
- The world is of facts not things.
-The world divides in to facts.
-The totality of facts determines what is the case and what is not.
-The World perceived is not made up of substance but of facts.
-SO..... if the world is made up of facts and the logical space is the experience of which we put these facts then that is the world we perceive. The facts in the logical space can only be verified as true or false because meaningless facts should not be spoken or thoguht about so should not be in the logical space.

5.Looking back at HCJ as a whole choose a topic/philosopher. Explain why they are important for journalistic reasons.

-This is to be revised and written individually so you'll have to come up with your own topic/philosopher.

Hope that has been of some use to you, Good Luck!

HCJ - The Stranger by Albert Camus

This book is short, sweet and to the point, in every way. The Stranger encompasses phenomenology and existentialism.

Existentialism is that you choose your life and your decisions and you then have to live by those choices. It also includes that there is no higher meaning and that potentially you have no soul. Camus explores this in his book when the main character Mersault tells the Prosecutor that he does not believe in God, thus making the prosecutor believe that he has no soul. The chaplain is also shocked when he hears that Mersault does not want to pray or believe in God.

Phenomenology is observing occurrences in the world. Mersault spends large amounts of time observing the street outside of his window, as well as his neighbours observing Raymond and his Mistress.

Heidegger had, 'The Structure of Being' which was three fold.

The past= guilt

The present= dread

The future= fear of the unknown

Mersault does not look to the past or to the future. When Marie asks if he will marry her he does not think about the future, settling down with her. He simply says, "yes" because he would like to kiss her. He does not have an opinion on love, the future or what life may be like with her. He does not fear the future, have guilt from the past or dread for the present. He lives his life how he likes and has routines but is not bothered when the routine is disrupted.

Mersault refuses to be determined by other people or lie. When his lawyer tells him he should lie about how he acted at his mothers funeral he refuses to. Even though this is what condems him to being executed. Different people, throughout the book question Mersault on his actions and instead of agreeing with them he carries on with his life and lives his life not answering to anyone and simply making his own decisions.

Mersault killed the Arab and instead of feeling guilty he just feels like it was an accident. He think about his execution and does try to think of how he can get out of the prison but finally resides himself to dying. He rationalises it in the fact that every person must die at some point and that his is simply coming earlier than liked.

When first starting to read this book i did not understand why he did not feel much for his mother. I kept expecting him to break down in tears and feel guilty that he was not there for her or that he did not want to picture the future without her but he does not do this. He carries on his life with ease and only think about little lines his mother used to say or remembers sense he felt on the day of his funeral. For example on the day he killed the Arab he remarked that the heat he felt was the same as the day of his mothers funeral.

Instead of acting how society would like him to act he repels this and does as he pleases. This is what kept him in prison and eventually his execution. On the day of his mothers funeral he could not remember her age, he did not cry, he slept, drank coffee and smoked cigarettes. He was questioned about many of these things and by simply answering or acting how society expected him to act would have given a different impression on the person and the jury that later heard what he had done. He did not do this but remained true to himself and did not live a lie, this is what makes him an existential hero; he refuses to be determined by other people.

HCJ - The New Industrial State by John Galbraith

I have decided to focus my reading on the motivation chapters in Galbraith’s book. This included the general theory of motivation, motivation in perspective and motivation and the technostructure.

The New Industrial State was published in 1967 after the Wall Street Crash and The Great Depression of 1929. Galbraith’s purpose for the book was to describe the economy as it was. His son wrote in The Guardian that his father had tried to, “deflate the faith in the market and to foster understanding of a world dominated by the technostructure.”

Galbraith says that the technostructure is a small group of technicians, managers, executives etc within an enterprise, with considerable influence and control in economy. He says that it is these people that have the true power over the organisations and not the share holder or the shares market because they are the ones that make the decisions. The share holders are simply there to keep the organisation growing and earning more money.

Galbraith defines an organisation as a “system of consciously co-ordinated activities or forces of 20 or more persons.” It means that the participating individuals are persuaded to set aside their individual purposes or goals and pursue the organisations. This is exactly the view of the Utilitarian movement, that people have to think of the greater good for the greatest number of people.

The executives of an organisation are the inner circle of the organisation with the roles lessening in importance as they spread out of the core. Linking this to motivation Galbraith believes that the closer an employee gets to the core of the circle the more they believe in the organisation’s goals, ambitions and want to help the company do this. What drives them to progress through the ranks of the organisation can be for four different reasons.

These reasons are: compulsion, pecuniary motivation, identification and adaptation. Compulsion is when the person fails to accept the goals of the group and will be punished. Galbraith quotes, “behind the man with the spade is another with a club.” This means that the person will work towards the goals of the organisation but will not accept them, they only work towards them because if they did not they would be punished. This would have normally been a slave but I think it could also be related to a person who has to do community service in modern times. They do not take on the goals of the cleaning agency but they clean the roads because they would be punished if they did not. If someone is under compulsion they will never see the organisation’s goals as superior to their own. Galbraith also says that, “what is compelled can not be a matter of choice. Alienation not identification will be the normal result.” Thus meaning that the person is never going to accept the organisations goals when they are being compelled to work towards them, and not done by choice.

Pecuniary motivation is when the employee accepts that the common goal may be purchased, that accepting the goals will bring an affirmative reward, most of the time, in the form of money. Pecuniary motivation is what drives a lot of people to work at an organisation, accept their goals and work towards them, for a wage.

Identification is when the individual finds the goals of the organisation far superior to their own and believe that they surpass their own goals. With identification the employee does not work because they have to or because of the monetary reward but because they believe that they would be serving better goals when taking on the organisations than following their own. This may happen in the services as the soldiers, sailors, RAF etc will follow the organisations goal of protecting Queen and Country over the own goals of maybe growing old with a family and a good job.

Adaptation is described as a person believing working for the organisation is an effective way of altering the organisations goals to more accurately reflect their own.

Galbraith also makes the point that the richer the country the better the unemployment compensation. Welfare is normally provided to lessen the compulsion to avoid unemployment. Meaning that it is better for the citizens to be working than it is for them not to be working. However, this may not be true under our government or at least the last Labour government as there were many articles depicting that for the some people they were better off financially than actually being in work. They would have more money living on benefits than if they worked for a wage. I know this is not true of all people but of quite a few it has been reported that they are better to avoid employment than to be part of it.

Identification and adaptation work together, when one is high the other is very low. For example if identification is low, adaptation will be high. The individual will want to alter the organisations goals to fit with their own. While if it is the opposite, that adaptation is low and identification is low, their own goals will be temporary forgotten so they concentrate and perfect the organisations goals.

Galbraith has some great ideas on why people are motivated to work towards goals and work towards more money. Some of them, such as the identification I can completely understand, as I believe this is a main reason for most people having a job and is definitely plausible. The other motivations, although I do not share in them yet can also understand why some people may have them. I think it depends on your career and your own goals in life. Overall a good few chapters to read and I recommend them to anybody.

HCJ Revision

This post should help give a little more information on each question or will explain it in a simpler way.

Question 1 - "Poland invades Germany" (from The Times) - the headline on the outbreak of WW2. Discuss with reference to Hannah Arendt's concept of totalitarianism AND John Carey's thesis in The Intellectuals and the Masses.

- Totalitarianism is ruling a country through terror. If the people are terrified of the dictator it will be easier to rule them. The people, in a totalitarian society will not fight against the dictator or oppose anything they do. If someone is branded a murderer, even if they were not anywhere near the scene of the crime, no one will believe their innocence or fight for them against the dictator. Google defines Totalitarianism as: "a form of government in which the ruler is an absolute dictator, (not restricted by any laws, constitution or opposition.)" Or Wiktionary defines it as: " a system of government where the people have virtually no authority and the state wields absolute control, a dictatorship." This is what Hannah Arendt also means by totalitarianism. Arendt also says that this was the mission of Hitler and the Nazi party; absence of individualism. Nothing is individual, everyone is jsut part of the masses, part of the crowd, part of their group. The Jews are not individuals they are part of the mass of Jews, defined by their religion as the group of masses they are in.

- Teleological is when people use God as the reason behind anything. They do not give a scientific reason but say and believe that it is the will of God. In the totalitarianist regime, they believe that society is teleological and that the reason they have this dictator, (Stalin, Hitler) is because of God. Society votes the dictator in because of the teleoglogical society.

-Pluralism is when there is a tolerance of different races, groups, religions etc. In a totalitarian regime, there is an absence of pluralism and different minorities or not tolerated, the Jews for example. As well as the gays and disabled people under Hitlers dictatorship.

- John Carey means masses as, 'the mob'. Masses is what happens when the mob become literate. Mass media, mass circulation is what makes the mob a political force. Carey says the the intellectuals fear the masses as they are dangerous, a formless weight and will destroy the intellectuals aristocratic influence. They become more and more dangerous when they become literate and want more than what they have all ready got.

- Carey says that Nietzsche does not like idea of society and diplomacy. Some intellectuals want to exterminate the masses as they see this as the only way to stop them from becoming more dangerous.

The masses gave in to fascism. Hitler was elected, by the masses. The masses could read and understand who they were electing in to office. Hitler was also very good at manipulating the masses. This is easily done with the masses as they are jsut a mob that can read.

Question 2 - How does the modern state differ from the classical or medieval state, according the Hannah Arendt. Discuss with reference to philosophical writing about the modern state with particular reference to Hobbes, Rousseau, J.S.Mill, Hegel and Marx.

- In this answer you should talk about all the different writers mentioned as well as nationalism, totatlitarianism and the teleological myth

-Nationalism is a lot like patriotism. They love and want to defend their state and their government/monarchy. When talking about nationalism in terms of this quesiton you can note how the antionalism has changed from the medieval state to the modern state. The medieval state's naitonalism would be for their religion. Protestants would be nationalist of England and their Queen/King as they believed that God had chosen their monarchy and they had a teleological society. Whereas in the modern society the nationalism is to protect their race against other races. They were nationalist of their Anglo-Saxon looks compared with the Jewish ones.

- Hobbes - He believed in having a strong and powerful state. He believed that if we did not have a strong and powerful state, with a nasty, brutal, sharp government the law of the jungle would prevail. He believed that The State of Nature was putting people in a constant conflict, and that we needed a common power, an absolout power. He was humanist (look at people the way they are) and was an Empiricist, (we know everything from sensory detail.)

- Hegel - teleological element - Prussian state is God on Earth. He believes the same as Hobbes.

- Rousseau - Believed that we should have a social contract and tat the state is all of our problem. We should not have a state who is always in power. He also believed that everyone should be free and enter their ideas in the General Free Will. He is a romanticist. We are born free but society changes us and that society is the main problem witht the world. When we gained society we gained self esteem - we saw ourselves in the eyes of others which is detrimental. He is also the opposite to Hobbes. He thinks that property and state control are the downfall of mans peaceful prehistoric life. We used to be noble savages, with no need for a state.

- J.S.Mill - classic liberal like Rousseau.

- Karl Marx - Believes the same as Hobbes and Hegel but does not believe about the God. He believes that the state is an instrument, the state is the ruling class and oppresses the proletariat. Hegelian - God or the self realisation of people.

- All of these old thinkers believe the theory is a contract. The state is a physical imbodiment on the march toward truth and freedom.

- Liberal - State does nothing and useless but have to have it - Rousseau and Mill - a convenient agreement. Mass literacy is the modern homogenised mass. The attempt to eliminate diversity, national literature, mass culture the State dominates civil society.

Question 3 - Attempt an analysis of the impact on Nietzsche and the modernist literary movement on journalism, popular culture and the mass media.

- Nietzsce's style of writing is non-linear, incoherent, body centered and fractured. There are little outbursts. He is subjective, the meaning of the book is in the mind of the reader. There is not one meaning for everyone, people have different meanings to them. The reader is the individual with the individual meaning to them this is 'cool'. There are a series of abstract symbols that thread together to get your own opinion, This is the same as abstract art, the viewer makes their own meaning and opinion on it, they are not told what to think or what it means. If it is 'hot' they are imposing the meaning on to the reader/viewer. This is an alturistic style.

- A morality is when you're told how you are feeling, what you are doing - "God is dead" - No single forve driving from the outside. There is morality but not jsut one single source. War on metaphysics, no ghosts, spirits, God, we are jsut here, we do not know why, we jsut are. -Modernism.

- Phenomenology means that each event is a pointless phenomena. The content is body centered, they are A moral. Not bad, not good - just normal.

- New journalism is made possible and writing facts, no speculating. Stick to the facts, do not moralise, tlel it like it is. Sensational writing, saying what you can see, a sensationalist story. Slogans like, "God is Dead" which are the headlines.

Question 4 - Explain the enduring fascination for many intellectuals and some journalists of the film Citizen Kane.

-Try not to spend too much time on the actual film of Citizen Kane. It was loosely based on William Randulph Hearst's life. You should focus on Hearst and link Citizen Kane in with some of your points and John Carey.

- Hearst rose from nothing and manipulates people for power. He never has enough power, Freud may say that this because he had no power in his childhood and driven by hidden needs.

- Talk about Freud and how the inner you is inside and that you are always wearing a fake mask. Wearing the mask wears you down and creates conflicts on the inside between the Ego, the Superego and the ID.

- John carey with the intellectuals. Hearst was not an intellectual but he rose through the ranks and became an intellectual. He then had the money and the news paper to help organise and inform the mob. This meant that the mob would back him and that he would receive more power from the mob, thus gaining more and more power, something he feels he must achieve from his inner conflicts.

This question should be a case study on Hearst, using Freud to express why Hearst is how he is. Rosebud is always the object he can never quite reach. The analysis of dreams where reosebud is there but it is static, no matter how fast you run at it you will never get it.

Question 5 - Asses the impact of Sigmund Freud on the media from Page 3 of The Sun, to BBC Public Service Broadcasting and from Cosmopolitan Magazine to the Jerry Springer Show.

- How Freud influenced ideas on to television and magazines. Ideas like: getting in touch with your feminie side, childcare, agony aunts, feminism etc.

- Pg3, everyone wants to always have sex. Men were not breastfed in the 40's and 60's so they would always have a stigma about breasts which is why they like looking at them.

- Cosmopolitan - this is to do with feminism and sex. Empowering women. Their slogan, 'Fun, Fearless, Females'.

-Jerry Springer - The ID is taking control, they alsh out and do what they want to do.

I hope that this blog post has been useful in revision for your exam on Thursday.

John Carey: The Intellectuals and the Masses

After making many notes, I thought I would add them on here. They are jsut points from the book that I found interesting and that give the overall theme of the book. The theme being that the rich intellectuals are trying to stop the poor masses gain any knowledge and better themselves. Seb rightly pointed out that the intellectuals were probably afraid of the masses bettering themselves and as a result tried and did stop this. They did this by making literature harder to read. This meant that the masses wouldn't be able to read it, get better jobs or earn more money. Here's the run down:

The different themes throughout the book:
The revolt of the masses,
Rewriting the masses,
The suburbs and the clerks,
Natural aristocrats.

-“The purpose of modernist writing, it suggests, was to exclude these newly educated (or semi-educated) readers and so to preserve the intellectual’s seclusion from the mass.”
-“Modernist literature and art can be seen as a hostile reaction to the un-precedently large reading public created by the C19th educational reforms.”
-Spanish philosopher, Jose Orteg Y Gasset – the revolt of the masses. Root of their worries was the population explosion from 1800 to 1914 from 180 to 460 million.
-3 Consequences to the explosion of population. 1. Overcrowding, doctors, cafes, beaches, waiting rooms etc. 2. Intrusion, the crowd takes possession of places that were designed for the best people. 3. The dictatorship of the masses.
-H.G.Wells said that the explosion of the new births was “the essential disaster to the C19th.”
-Nietzsche agrees with Ortega and says that many too many are born and Zarathustra declares, “they hang on to their branches much too long.”
-“The difference between the C19th mob and the C20th mass is literacy”. This was after they bought in the educational legislation which introduced universal elementary education.
-The mass is a metaphor for the unknowable and the invisible. It denies them individuality which we ascribe ourselves and the people we know.
-Tinned Salmon is repeatedly a feature in lower class cuisine.
-George Orwell says that tinned food destroyed the health of the British people.
-In Ortega's view, a mass man is that he is un-ambitious and common. The aim of all of his writings was to segregate the intellectuals from the masses and to acquire control over them with that that language gives. Pg 23
-Nietzsche's idea of mass is a large herd of animals.
-Virginia Wolf, Nietzsche, William Inge, T.S.Eliot all think that they should eliminate the humanity of the masses and degrade them in to weeds, a rabble, a shapeless jelly of human stuff, occasionally wobbling this way or that.
-Hitler refers to Jews as a bacterial disease.
-According to Le Bon, crowds are mentally inferior and intent on destruction. As soon as a man joins a crowd he automatically drops a few rungs on the ladder.
-Trotter thinks that there are many different sorts of herds/masses. Some are good like bees and others are bad like wolves. He thinks that the Germans are a bad mass and that they need a good thrashing.
-Kodak, invented by George Eastmen in New York in 1888 bought photography with the reach of every human being.
-Forster travelled from Japan to England to Italy to India and took note of the lower classes and found India the most colourful.
-Writers made the poorer side of the mass, cosmetically ugly. No teeth, begging, bulging etc
-Graham Greene did not feel sorry for the workers/unemployed as when the great Strike happened he sided opposite the workers and got a job beating them. He remarked on it being like rugger at school.
-George Orwell noticed the caste system when he was about 6. His parents did not allow him to play with the ‘common’ children. He does not blame his family for this as it is normal middle class snobbishness but the lower class ceased to be ‘a race of friendly and wonderful human beings’ and became enemies – ‘almost subhuman’ and ‘brutal’. Pg 40
-Indoctrination on young children of the caste system and who should and should not be friends with. Who are humans and who are not.
-Somerset Maugham says that it is not the lower class fault of their smelling sweat, they do not have bathrooms.
-Orwell renamed the masses the Proles and said that they live in dirt, among rats and bed bugs. Pg 43 They are also ignorant, stupid and gullible.
-The Frankfurt theorists, not Benjamin, shared the view that mass culture and the mass media, as developed under capitalism, had degraded civilization in the C20. They blamed radio, cinema, newspapers and cheap books for the ‘disappearance of the inner life’.
-They also believe that if the mass turned in to individuals and fought the bourgeoisie life would be better. However they won’t and O’Briens warns Winston: “If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever”.
-There was an increase in people moving to suburban areas and commuting to the big cities as it was cheaper. People did however not like the eating up of the countryside around London and such places. Pg 46
-People did not like the rows and rows of housing. Nietzsche commented on it as a child taking them out of his toy box.
-Nice middle class homes surrounded by meadows now occupied terraced houses on every bit of green land.
-The masses caused irreparable damage with their cheap housing taking up the countryside. Another reason for upper classes to not like the poorer ones. Pg 49
-The speed of it too. A couple of decades and everything’s gone.
-This made writers head to other places to write. Pg 50 They did this to escape ugly Britain but tourist destinations were being made just as ugly.
-Greene thought that because of the cremation act the masses had turned even death in to a conveyor belt level. Pg 51
-Writers had different opinions on what suburbia was like. Pg 52
-Northcliffe Daily Mail aiming it at Clerks with the cycle column, tit bits and answers, pg 58
-George Bernard Shaw and Nietzsche strive for the overman, the ubermensch .

-Adam and eve mentioned briefly on pg 67
-Nietzsche says that men are not equal. The mistaken belief that they are is to blame for the degeneracy of Europe. The truly noble man is egotistic. He despises pity, which is unhealthy and us valued only by slaves. The warrior is the type of the finest man. Pg 72
-Pg 80 If society wants to be civilized it must establish conditions favourable to the preservation of the gifted few.
-Pg 82 Iany theory of natural aristocracy must attribute the aristocrats superiority either to intrinsic qualities, (secret knowledge, better artistic taste, superior vitality, etc) or to some kind of supernatural selection.
-He saves his maximum invective for last – and unleashes it on Wyndham Lewis, whose views he argues are not dissimilar to those of Adolf Hitler. And just in case we misunderstand, he points out that this is not simply crude anti-semitism and a hatred for jazz music and Negroes, but that Hitler, like the other intellectuals of modernism, believed in an intellectual hierarchy, in great art which was produced by special individuals endowed with quasi-religious insights (rather like God, in fact) and that none of this was accessible to the masses. The implication however was that it was accessible to the people making these judgments – such as Clive Bell up on his cold white peaks.

I hope that proves useful to anyone wanting a simple explanation of John Carey, The Intellectuals and the Masses.

Everything about Everything about our Law Exam

This is more or less just a recap of Tuesdays lesson. Thought however that it may worth posting as some people may not have been there or missed a couple of explanations.

The test itself is an hour long. 5 questions. 10 minutes for each question. Need only 40 % to pass.

Some key points to revise from McNaes -

Defamation, the: PCC, Ofcom and the BBC codes of conduct, Libel, the 10 point test, these are just a few important ones, these are one to try and go revise in quite a bit of detail as you could be asked about something specific.

The rest now are definitions of words that either could come up in the exam, or you may just need to know so that you can refer to it, when answering another question. For example if you had a question on Libel you may also want to refer to qualified privilege. Therefore a good understanding of all the definitions could be very useful. Even if they just give you an overview of what it means.

Libel - An article or broadcast that identifies someone, defames them and is published to a third person. (Publication, identification, defamation.) The only defence against libel is, qualified privilege.

3 defences for Libel-

1. 
   It is true and you can prove it.
2. It is only comment, an honest opinion based on fact, without malice.
3. Qualified privilege
   

Qualified Privilege - When a comment is made in active court, in front of a BRITISH judge. If you write an article about a point made in court you must write it fast, accurately and fairly.

Malice - Writing or broadcasting anything that you know is not true. If taken to court and sued for malice you are not allowed defend yourself. You will not be given a chance.

Public Interest - Exposing something for the public interest. However if you are broadcasting you need prior consent needed from Ofcom. A proper definition of public interest can be found in the PCC's code of conduct. We are the 4th estae, we have to watch the first 3.

Inuendo - Making an allegation with absoloutly no evidence. Implying that it is a fact is also a form of malice and if sued you will not be able to defend yourself.

Juxtaposition - In English terms it is putting two words next to each other that are opposites such as "bitter sweet" however in Journalism it means putting two stories next to each other, on the same page that could be linked. For example, putting Gordon Browns picture next to a headline, "Man murders party people". This could be construde as inuendo, that Gordon Brown was the man that murdered the party people. This could also allow for you being sued.

Defamation - A story or comment that lowers peoples reputation, with or without justification. True or not. One problem with defamation is that it is very broad and many things could be said to be defamatory. There is a 3 point list that make it defamatory -

1. Could expose someone to ridicule, contempt or hatred.
2. Cause them to be shunned and avoided. E.g. saying that someone has Aids.
3. Demeaning in their profession.

Slander - This is defamation between 2 people speaking. This is very hard to prove as it is hard to get evidence. The person has to be identified but it doesn't have to be published.

Plaintiff - They have 1 year from the article/broadcast was published, to gather their evidence. this means that you have to keep all of your notes for at the very least of one year, if you do not have the notes and rushes it will look as if you are lying.

Subterfuge - This is when you are not honest. You have to declare: who you are, your job, who you work for and when the article/broadcast will be published. If you do not do this you are comitting subterfuge.

Your only defence of subterfuge is if you can not get the story any other way and you have tried, and that it is overwhelmingly in the case of public interest. If you are broadcasting you will need to tell Ofcom prior to comitting the subterfuge and get their permission.

I hope that you all find these notes useful for your revision cards. Remember the test is on the morning of 15th, the same day as our HCJ unseen class test. Also remember that Chris said if you fail miserably you can resit and commit one case of plagiarism, thus meaning you can copy someone with 100% and you'll get the same mark without it going against you, yay!

Good Luck