HAM433 Blog Response (Week 6)

I am currently in the middle of reading Al Gore’s book “The Assault on Reason”. The book is focused on the US but much of it relates Australia. A main point of discussion in the book is that you need money to win an election. Therefore an independent candidate in a small town is unlikely to become president because they need money to pay for advertising. The most likely to win an election are those who are already millionaires or can get companies to invest in them. The election campaign becomes about who has the best commercials and who can get the most airtime. Once in power, the government then has to pay the media for advertising space using taxpayer’s money.

I think that political parties should get to advertise for free. There should be a law that if a political party makes an advertisement then the opposite party also gets equal time for advertising. There should also be a set amount of political ads per day.

I think that it is important that people get more interested in politics and world issues. The majority of people would just watch the evening news and many would have trouble answering general questions. People need to be encouraged to watch more current affairs. There also need to be more interactivity. Devices such as Tivo and Apple TV allow TVs to be connected the internet to download movies. This technology should be extended to allow people to have real-time conversations as they watch a show. Some movies on Blu-Ray already allow this.

HAM433 Week Two Blog Response: Broadcast and technology

This is the lead response to a HAM433 class activity which is based on the case study that can be found at http://www.newsu.org/. The case discusses the time when footage on KARE-TV of an ice boat sailing event that was sped up to make the boats look like they were travelling faster then they were. The ethics of manipulating images was raised.

The way that a video is edited definitely can alter the perceptions of the audience. Guide lines should be in place to ensure that the audience understands what has been altered.

Speeding up footage is something that would be associated with a slick television ad. Those spray and wipe type cleaners come to mind. The “before” and “after” photos of people in ads for some weight loss programs also bring up ethical issues.

The issue of slowing down footage was highlighted on the TV show “Chaser’s War on Everything”. The show is always critical of the techniques used by Today Tonight and Current Affair, a common user of criminals walking slowly. Once, the Chaser team slowed down footage of ordinary people walking so that they would look like criminals.

Another common practice is the use of stock or file footage during news reports. This is a useful tool but unfortunately I have noticed a trend over the past year. Footage is being placed into reports without mentioning that it is stock footage. It looks as it is part of the news story. This could mislead viewers into thinking that it is new footage. Some of the footage does not accurately represent the current situation but a generalisation of similar events.

The reality show Survivor had controversy a few years ago when it was revealed that many of the wide shots and aerial shots were made using hired extras instead of the contestants. This allowed the show to contain camera angles that were not possible during the original recording. The revelation put into doubt the reality of reality television.

The viewer needs to be told about the manipulations before and during a story if they are to trust the media. If the viewer finds out after the show through another source, they will definitely feel deceived or tricked.

There needs to be assessment of when it is the right time to use the techniques such as slow-motion, speeding up video, freeze frames and dissolves. Slow motion and speeding up definitely should not be used when the speed of an event or object is the issue. Speeding up of the boat footage might have made the activity look more risky or reckless then it is.

Speeding up footage can be useful in situations where it is important to show events uncut in short amount of time, such as showing a couple of minutes of security camera footage in a couple of seconds. Slowing down footage can reveal hidden actions that would not be noticed at normal speed.

With both the altering of film speed and use of stock footage, I strongly believe that it is important that, at the minimum, to display text at the top or bottom of the screen saying “file footage” or “footage speed increased”. They might make a statement at the beginning of the report. I can understand that making a statement during the report might disturb the flow.