... refers to refers to changes that the act of observing will make on the phenomenon being observed. This is most often encountered in science, but it's something that today's media should perhaps reflect on a little.
There are currently two big news stories running in the national press in which media reporting has actually changed the subject being reported.
The first is Prince Harry's possible deployment to Iraq, which the head of the British Army General Sir Richard Dannatt has rescinded, blaming detailed and persistent news reporting of where Harry might be and what he would be doing.
Dannatt said: 'A contributing factor to this increase in threats to Prince Harry has been the widespread knowledge and discussion of his deployment. It is a fact that this close scrutiny has exacerbated the situation and this is something that I wish to avoid in future.'
The second case is that of the missing child Madelaine McCann. A Mirror reporter's suspicions of a man close to the investigation have provided several days of sensationalist headlines, speculation and probing. If this man turns out to be innocent, his life will have been ruined. If he is prosecuted, the media coverage will have done much to ensure he cannot face a fair trial. Either way, the news media has acted with shocking irresponsibility.
Journalists hold great power, but with great power comes great responsibility. This is something most of our media have yet to learn, and I fear will not learn unless they are forced to do so by repressive media laws. Yet these would indiscriminately constrain the most serious and important reporting, along with the salacious fripperies. Journalists, especially commissioning editors, should seriously think about the role that they are playing in current affairs, and how they choose to use the power that they hold over other people's lives.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment