Protagonists of conventionally well accepted principles of morality and ethics in public life consider that the controversial video clip may have constituted a breach of the station's own ethical guidelines, a breach of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and a violation of the very Sexual Offences Act, which the moderator had sought to highlight.
Indeed, in light of the imperatives and dictates of our Telecommunications legislation and of the unwritten broadcasting code to which we subscribe, such a perception may be well-founded.
But the issues raised by this controversy have opened the door for the commencement of the discourse on the subject of the media, its perpetually changing face and of the increasing role of mass communication in societal development.
Within the last two decades there have been monumental technological advances that have collectively re-sculptured media’s inward and outward appearance.
But the issues raised by this controversy have opened the door for the commencement of the discourse on the subject of the media, its perpetually changing face and of the increasing role of mass communication in societal development.
Within the last two decades there have been monumental technological advances that have collectively re-sculptured media’s inward and outward appearance.
The effervescent bloom of “social media” has widened the conversation and has expanded the community.
These are inescapable realities which we must contemplate upon in shaping our democracy.
The advent of the social networking phenomenon including Facebook, Twitter and My Space has literally brought media into our homes. At one time, media merely touched our lives. Now it touches our lifestyle.
The State, our legislators, the pressure groups, the schools, churches and civic minded must therefore engage the conversation on the media partnering to provide valuable answers to critical questions we face as a growing democracy.
The State, our legislators, the pressure groups, the schools, churches and civic minded must therefore engage the conversation on the media partnering to provide valuable answers to critical questions we face as a growing democracy.
The conversation must of course be premised on crafting media’s free and fair and free from fear space operating concurrently with a citizenry whose rights remain intact.
In the instant case involving Crime Watch, the microcosmic issue was whether the footage, geared to initiate a police response to an alleged crime, had instead inflicted a wound on morality and had crossed the boundary of responsible media.
In the instant case involving Crime Watch, the microcosmic issue was whether the footage, geared to initiate a police response to an alleged crime, had instead inflicted a wound on morality and had crossed the boundary of responsible media.
Did the broadcast prompt police action? Has Crime Watch as a television series assisted in the fight against crime? Did the broadcast compromise the course of any judicial action?
That conversation must inevitably delve into whether the motives and ambitions of Crime Watch were debilitative to the intent and aspirations of the State. And if it were, what is the formula for co-existence?
The wider conversation must consider the concept of the repackaged media of the 21st Century, the impact that it has had on own socio-political evolution and embracing it as a partner in nation building.
Ashvani Mahabir | Attorney-at-Law & Research Consultant
The wider conversation must consider the concept of the repackaged media of the 21st Century, the impact that it has had on own socio-political evolution and embracing it as a partner in nation building.
Ashvani Mahabir | Attorney-at-Law & Research Consultant
No comments:
Post a Comment