Draft "Good morning charlotte here. Thank you for joining us this morning. Today we talk about how social media affects your life. Now, from the messages you send through Facebook to the tweets you post to your favourite celebrities. A recent study shows that children use social media on average 27 a week. Do you see yourself using social media a lot? I reckon that most of you at home watching this are familiar with social media whether you use it or friends and family do. But did you know that Facebook has 757 million daily users, but it isn't all fun and games Mr Sheppard, a parent discussed some impacts of social media on his children with our correspondent Charlotte.
<Cut to Mr Sheppards>
Child mind institute says that social media can make children have "less self-esteem" but other studies show that social media "enhance an individual and collect creativity through development and sharing of artistic and musical movements" Thank you for watching, goodbye!"
Chessie interview draft
Keyboard shot draft
Use sub-editing skills to finalise article for broadcast
After sub editing
Explain Mode of address and structure used
What is the purpose of your article that you have to write? The purpose of my news articles is to inform young people about the positive and negative effects of social media. Also displaying how the effects are viewed by a parent and whether they think is a positive or negative influence. Hopefully my article will help young people form an understanding towards social media and help them with it. Who is the audience? The target audience is around 7 to 15/16 as these are the kind of people that watch Newsround whether its through TV Broadcast or online, also I know that this age range is being introduced to the use social media so need to be informed before they get too influenced. Should the language be informal or formal and why? The language should be informal as the target audience is children and young people formal language would only bore them and they may not even understand. Also if I were to speak formally I wouldn't feel like a peer and more like a teacher to them whereas if I'm informal using words they understand I will be more peer to peer and less boring. Along with this a young host because the young audience wont want to see an older person as they will be turned off as the audience will think its not peer to peer or news they don't want to hear. Is the style direct or indirect and why? The style is very direct as I mentioned in the introduction a rhetorical question with the word "you" in it immediately making the audience feel involved and so they know the article is targeted at them. making them want to listen. This adds a more personal affect making the audience know its important as it about themselves making them want to listen more. Should the tone be teacher to pupil, parent to child or peer to peer? Remember this is Newsround what is the expected tone and how does your article achieve this? The tone will definitely be peer to peer so the audience don't feel intimidated by the presenter and immediately feel turned off. If the article was teacher to pupil it would be too formal and make the audience bored or feel too pressured. The same with parent to child as this will be too patronising making them feel to pressured and may become upset. Therefore the peer to peer approach is calmer and relaxed as the others are too formal and intimidating. Why did you use the images / video you used? How did they enhance the article for the audience? I used the images I did because they displayed the social media I was talking about, for example when I was speaking about the effects of Facebook a picture the Facebook logo to fit in with the story and help people get an understanding of the social media I am talking about. As well as the collage of different social media platforms again just enhancing and furthering the understand of the topic and what social media in particular. The video of the Facebook page was be displaying the kind of things Facebook distributes and what is often shared on my wall also getting an understanding of what social media is like for any children watching who don't. The interviews where used to develop the story again adding in anecdotes and opinions to show that everyone has a different view on social media and how it effect people differently. The images enhanced the article as it becomes less boring with the people compared to me just constantly talking about social media to a camera. The same with the video they help change the tempo of the story making the audience more engaged to other pieces of content within my article. Are your initial sentences structured so that the ‘who’, ‘what’ and ‘where’ is clear in the opening paragraph? Give examples. An example of one of the sentences with my piece is "Do you see yourself using social media a lot?" The who in this is the audience evident by the "you" which targets whoever's listening. The what is "social media" which is the subject of the article and the where could be "social media" which obviously implies online. So simple and easy to understand and straight to the point no ambitious writing or complex sentences they wont understand. Does your next few paragraphs include the ‘why’ and ‘how’.? Give examples The next paragraph is from a VT package, this still has 'why' and 'how' as I say "Child mind institute says that social media can make children have "less self-esteem" but other studies show that social media "enhance an individual and collect creativity through development and sharing of artistic and musical movements"" The why within this is the "enhances individuals" which is answered through the "sharing of artistic and musical movements" which is the how. The how question could be how does it enhance an individual. Did you include at least two of the most useful and valid sources that were evaluated in D1? Discuss how these enhanced your article. The most useful and valid source I think was my interview with Mr Sheppard as it was about to explain a positive and negative impact making my story more balanced as well as showing an outsider perspective of social media on his children reflecting on the effects on all children. I also think Chessie interview was very important I was able to get an opinion from a young person which definitely helps develop my story as the target audience will understand more what she is talking about and will be less intimidated as she is just like them.
Justify the choice of sourced information to be referenced within the article
Finished Broadcast Programme
List at least three ways that the article breaks or does not break the Editor’s Code of Practice and explain why?
1. Children - Within the Editors code of Practice one of the codes of children where it states -
Therefore my production doesn't break this code as Chessie, one of my interviewees was 16 when I interviewed her meaning she was above the age where I didn't have to get consent from a parent or guardian. Also she was not pulled out of lesson for the interview and was able to perform the interview in her spare time willingly. Nor did I pay Chessie to be in my story or reveal any personal information other than her first name as consented within doing this I kept to the code with not producing her identity to far like saying her name, address or anything like that. By doing this I stayed to the code within this interview and also the Data Protection Act 1998 stating I mustn't distribute anyone data like address ect which I didn't. In Mr Sheppards interview I spoke to him about his children (which was consented) however the names of his children and their identity was never mentioned nor asked and they remained completely anonymous. This means I didn't not break the code as they're identity was never revealed nor anything personal as I never asked personal questions about his children or himself that wasn't already consented.
2.Accuracy Accuracy is very important within a news article as many people rely on news broadcasts to gain information about what is happening around the world so if the data is wrong then this will be misleading to the audience and break the accuracy code within the Editors code of Practice. The code states -
I believe I stuck to this code and didn't break it as I know my target audience is young so I knew I couldn't produce invalid content could they would believe me so I made sure that the information I found was valid and true by comparing it to other websites and previous documentaries and interviews on the same subject. Also some of the data I collected was from interviews so the data I received there was from their personal opinion of how social media effects them and their children. So I think I didn't break this as the information I achieved was from reliable sources that cover information like social media on children sourced be investigations and scientists.
3. Intrusion into grief or shock - This code states -
Because my article didn't completely dwell on the negative effects and potential grief that may come my story therefore doesn't break this code. Also when I spoke about the negative effects I made sure to not sound too sad or angry towards them and stayed normal if not slight sympathy.
4.Harrasment This code states -
When asking all of my interviewees whether they would like to answer some questions for a news broadcast I did not harass them by asking too much or threaten them and only asked them calmly with no force. This was unnecessary as both the people I interviewed gave immediate conformation and consent to the interview. I also didn't bribe them as there were no payments made to the people I interviewed. Therefore I didn't break this code as I addressed them calm and friendly and I would've respected their choice either way.
5.Privacy - The code says -
I kept to this code as I never displayed anyone's identity to an extreme extend and only used Chessies first name which is actually a nickname and Mr Sheppards professional name which he consented to as well as Chessie. I asked both of the interviewees what they wanted to be referred as which those names are the names they wanted. I never broke the Data Protection Act 1998 as I never displayed any of their personal information like address or full name, therefore I never broke this code either.
List several ways that the article breaks or does not break the OFCOM Broadcasting Code Guidance (specifically: Sections 1,2,3,4,5,7 and 8) and explain why.
Section 1 Rule 1.4 Watershed - My story does not break this code as my broadcast will be shown before the watershed as I know that the broadcast cant show anything not appropriate for young people before a certain time so that children are influenced negatively and watch anything inappropriate. Newsround is always on in the morning which is when the story would air. Nothing within my story is too negative nor dwells on negativity, also none of the content is inappropriate for broadcast before the watershed as the target audience is children so nothing in my broadcast is not for children. Section 2, 2.2 Factual programmes or items or portrayals of factual matters must not materially mislead the audience. I believe that my story also follows this code as the information I collected was factually correct as the sites were reliable and had plenty of information on about social media effects that I could have used. None of the information used was sourced from places that didn't seem reliable as I need everything to be accurate as my target audience of young people will easily believe information from Newsround as it is a reliable source they are frequent with and know well. Section 3, 3.1 Material likely to encourage or incite the commission of crime or to lead to disorder must not be included in television or radio services or BBC ODPS. My article definitely doesn't have any sort of crime in it and does not condone or promote it. The negatives within my story are not dwelled on therefore should not be acted on also I try to calm the negatives with positive so no one feels like they are being pressured to perform violence or think its okay. No pictures, words or information should promote violence nor does it have the intention to either.
Section 3, 3.3 Material which contains abusive or derogatory treatment of individuals, groups, religions or communities, must not be included in television and radio services or BBC ODPS except where it is justified by the context. I follow this rule as I do not have any content that contains abuse or derogatory treatment to individuals or anyone in particular. The content can be aired on BBC as it is aimed at children so it is appropriate. However I have targeted a group being young people however I have not aimed any abuse towards them or victimised them at all so I still have followed this code.
Section 5, 5.1 News, in whatever form, must be reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality. Again I think that my news article is accurate and follows this rule as I have checked my information thoroughly. Because I am interviewing two people there could be bias pieces on information they distribute but this is because this is her opinion of the topic. However I have another interview that is balanced talking about both negative and positive effects which helps balance out the later interview with a teen about social media.
Section 7, 7.1 Broadcasters must avoid unjust or unfair treatment of individuals or organisations in programmes. I believe I stuck to this in my article as I never mentions any organisation therefore never treated them unfairly or poorly. I never victimised on individual and treating them unfair. I did target a group of people being young people but never treated them poorly or mention and thing negative about that certain group.
Section 8, 8.2 Information which discloses the location of a person’s home or family should not be revealed without permission, unless it is warranted. I believe I followed this as I never asked the people I was interviewing for their address as it was irrelevant to my story therefore it was never mentioned within my story. The interview I had with Mr Sheppard was about his family particularly about his children but I had already told him that to which he consented to and allowed me to interview him about. I never forced him to talk about his children and spoke about them willingly.
Section 8, 8.7 If an individual or organisation’s privacy is being infringed, and they ask that the filming, recording or live broadcast be stopped, the broadcaster should do so, unless it is warranted to continue. I have not gone against or broken this code as no individual felt like they wanted to stop the filming as nothing I did or said pushed them that way. Nothing would have pressured them this way as the questions were known before recording so nothing would have taken them off guard or made them think to stop recording. They all know what they were being asked and what they were getting themselves into. If they were to feel uncomfortable while filming I would have followed the code and stopped filming.
List several ways that the article breaks or does not break the BBC Editorial Guidelines (specifically the Sections on Accuracy, Impartiality, Harm and Offence, Fairness, Privacy, Reporting Crime, Children and Young People as Contributors, Editorial Integrity) and explain why.
Section 3,3.1 Accuracy: I believe that my story did not break this accuracy code as the information I received was from reliable sites that work with scientists to gather information also I compared the data to even more reliable sites like BBC to see if the data they received is similar. Also the data was compared to recent documentaries I found online from sources like BBC and Channel 4 to see the kind of data they received compared to mine. Some of my data was collected from primary sources like interviews that gave me facts and information about how social media effects different kinds of people which were opinions so this data cant be accurate or not accurate. I double checked my facts to ensure they were accurate. Section 5, Harm and Offence I think that my article does not break this rule as I made sure that my article was appropriate for the age of my target audience looking at the wording and information that I found making sure that it is suitable and doesn't use any bad language that may offend anyone or harm them. Although my topic may be harsh in aspects I don't dwell on the negatives and keep a neutral balanced argument with no violence mention that may offend someone. Section 6, 6.1 Fairness, contributors and consent I was fair in my article as I credited all the websites I got my data from making sure that the contributors to my article were given their fair credit otherwise I wouldn't of been able to make my article at all. However I never asked to use their information except the interviewees but the websites I got no consent but I still referenced them as they were helpful. Section 7, 7.1 Privacy I believe that I stuck to this privacy rule as I didn't ask anyone personal questions that they didn't already know were going to be asked. However I didn't ask questions like address and full name or anything just simple questions they consented to about themselves or their children. No personal information was leaked of my crew members or my interviewees. Section 8, Reporting crime and anti social behaviour I think that i didn't break this rule either as within my article I am not reporting any kind of crime or anti social behaviour and only cover social media. I made sure to stay in the publics interests by adapting my story so more people are appealed to it as well as making it appropriate for Newsround and trying not cause moral panic by finding ways to avoid it. Section 9, Children and young people as contributors I did not break this rule as my interviewees were both above 16 making it alright that I didn't ask their parents . They both consented and allowed me to film them. I didn't take Chessie out of lesson time as the interview was conducted during her free time. Therefore I stuck to this rule within my article as well. However if she was under 16 and was in school time when I interviewed her I would be breaking the rules as I never asked her parents nor am I allowed to have them out of lesson time. But because I didn't do this I stuck to the code. Section 14, 14.1 Editorial Integrity My article did not break this code as I do not a have an opinion on this topic as I see both the positive and negative effects of social media and have experienced them so I just wanted to share it with everyone else. This showed as I made sure my article was balanced and neutral from an outside stand point not an opinionated one. So I think I stuck to this code as the BBC are very neutral I also decided to stay neutral as well.