Mediaboss Marketing

* New media (Berlin: 4NM.BE - news) watchdog does not mean more censorship-report

* New council to cover all media platforms

* Wider reviews on media convergence, ownership under way (Adds detail)

CANBERRA, March 2 (Reuters) - An Australian inquiry sparked by concerns about journalistic practices at Rupert Murdoch's News Corp on Friday recommended a new body to set and enforce standards across the country's tightly owned media.

The inquiry was launched following Murdoch's News of the World phone hacking scandal in Britain and after criticism by some politicians of biased coverage by Murdoch newspapers of the Australia government.

Australian media is among the world's most concentrated, with Murdoch's News Ltd controlling some 70 percent of the country's newspaper ownership. Murdoch's main newspaper rival in of Australia is the Fairfax Media Group.

The independent report, released by the Australian government, called for a "News Media Council" to set media standards and handle complaints made by the public.

"The establishment of a council is not about increasing the power of government or about imposing some form of censorship," the report said.

"It is about making the news media more accountable to those covered in the news, and to the public generally."

It recommended that the new body cover news and current affairs coverage on all platforms, print, online, radio and television, replacing the Australian Press council which only handles complaints against print media.

Follow this link:
UPDATE 1-Australian media inquiry recommends new watchdog

* New media (Berlin: 4NM.BE - news) watchdog does not mean more censorship-report

* New council would cover all media platforms

* Murdoch's News Ltd rejects watchdog recommendation

* Wider reviews on media convergence, ownership under way (Updates with more detail, News Ltd and political reaction)

CANBERRA, March 2 (Reuters) - An Australian inquiry sparked by concerns about journalistic practices at Rupert Murdoch's News Corp on Friday recommended a new government-funded body to set and enforce standards across the country's tightly owned media.

Murdoch's local arm News Ltd immediately rejected the recommendation for a "News Media Council" which could force media to uphold journalistic ethics and issue an apology, correction or retraction, or grant a person right of reply.

The inquiry was launched following Murdoch's News of the World phone hacking scandal in Britain and after criticism by some politicians of biased coverage by Murdoch newspapers of the Australia government.

Australian media is among the world's most concentrated, with Murdoch's News Ltd controlling some 70 percent of its newspaper ownership. Murdoch's main newspaper rival in Australia is the Fairfax Media Group.

The independent report, released by the government, called for a News Media Council to set media standards and handle complaints made by the public.

"The establishment of a council is not about increasing the power of government or about imposing some form of censorship," the report said.

Original post:
UPDATE 2-Murdoch-sparked media inquiry recommends new Australian watchdog

The Bovee University Center hosted the fourth Speak Up, Speak Out forum Wednesday night, titled R They Watching U? Technology, Surveillance, Censorship & Privacy Rights.

This event brought together Central Michigan University students and staff to discuss Internet interaction, censorship and awareness to what truly stays private on the web.

SUSO opened its event with nearly 20 minutes of video clips introducing SOPA and PIPA, bills recently introduced in Congress to stop Internet piracy, along with new ways to track individuals breaking the law. These clips were then turned over to the SUSO panel and student audience to discuss online behaviors and control.

These are complex topics, said Justin Smith, assistant professor of sociology. We should be questioning to what extent do schools and universities and the criminal justice system punish folks for their online behavior; we should be at least questioning the rules that are being created. Some of them might be better than others.

Amanda Garrison, member of the forum panel and professor of sociology, said that she took a lot with her from Wednesdays event.

When it comes down to am I going to pay, even if I dont have to after hearing this I dont want people who do clerical work to lose their job, so its something that I have to consider, Garrison said.

Besides illegal music downloads and the threats of cyber bullying, the Internet works against us in one major way: Terms and conditions, panel members stressed.When setting up accounts on any social network site, the final step is usually to agree the terms and conditions issued by each network. Most turn a blind eye to the 20-page document, scrolling to the bottom of the page and clicking the accept button, with no idea of what they have actually agreed to.

Finance and law professor, Ken Sanney, broke down the information stated within the terms and conditions, using the example of senior pictures. Sanney said that, as seniors in high school, everyone is eager to post their senior pictures online. These pictures are professionally taken and, most likely, the rights are still owned by the photographer.

Because of the terms and conditions box, social networking users sign over use of their pictures to sites like Facebook, who can then use them at their disposal. If Facebook decides to use one of these senior pictures for advertisement, the photographer who owns the pictures rights can sue Facebook, who can turn right around and sue whoever posted the picture in the first place. This is just one example of censorship hidden within terms and conditions.

Im not trying to scare the students, I was trying to engage them and make them think, Sanney said. I do know that some students are harmed by what they place online. If you look at Facebook, it looks like a museum of your life. They are trying to create that air of your life. There is good and bad of it, each of us just has to weigh the cost with the benefit.

Read more:
Students, faculty debate Internet copyright, censorship at Speak Up, Speak Out forum

Russian journalists are complaining about layoffs, audits and censorship. It seems voices critical of the Kremlin are to be banished from the media before the presidential election.

Ahead of the presidential elections on March 4, it seems that everything in the Russian media revolves around the Kremlin's candidate, Vladimir Putin. On television, in newspapers and on the Internet, he is ubiquitous.

The other four presidential candidates are given far less coverage in the media. Putin announced that he had no time for TV debates with them. The 59-year-old prime minister served two terms as president from 2000-2008 and wants to return to the role once more.

Radio station stifled

Putin puts forward his case on the internet

To keep everything the way Putin likes it, critical media are under increasing pressure. This can be seen, for example, in the moves made against staff at the radio station Ekho Moskvy, which has long been the most critical voice in the country. Some three weeks before the presidential election, the station's main shareholder, Gazprom Media - a subsidiary of state-controlled energy company Gazprom - fired editor-in-chief Alexei Venediktov and three other directors from the station's board of directors.

Venediktov said it was clear the intent was to increase pressure on Ekho Moskvy, so that the station would in future report positively about Putin. The prime minister had recently berated Venediktov using coarse language, accusing the station of failing to report about him in an appropriate manner and of serving US interests.

"It is clear that Gazprom has instructed its people to work flat out before the elections," Alexei Simonov, head of Moscow's Glasnost Defense Foundation, told DW. Gazprom Media has become active in other instances, he said. Of note is the dismissal of four senior managers of the Russian publishing house Kommersant by its owner Alisher Usmanov, who is also Managing Director of Gazprominvestholding, another Gazprom subsidiary.

Authorities target Dozhd TV station

Alexei Venediktov was fired from the board of Ekho Moskvy

Link:
Kremlin turns up the pressure on critical media

The Far East government is known for strict censorship when it comes to social networking, but this week its citizens caught onto a glitch in the system and glimpsed an uncensored world.

China's "Great Firewall" is the tongue-in-cheek way to refer to the Chinese government's blocking and censorship of Web sites. And, somehow, that wall has been fractured this week.

It all started when Chinese citizens flooded President Obama's Google+ page over the weekend, leaving thousands of messages ranging from jokes to begging the U.S. president to do something about China's civil rights issues.

Now, Reuters reports that Chinese Internet users have accessed YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter--all sites normally blocked by the Great Firewall.

The Chinese government has set up alternate social-networking sites--the most popular is a microblogging platform called Weibo. However, according to government rules, anyone who uses this site and other local social-networking sites must register their real names for verification by government authorities. Also, certain topics are taboo on these sites.

It's unclear how people got onto YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter, but according to Reuters people were able to access the sites on both mobile phones and desktops on Monday and Tuesday. By Wednesday, however, the Great Firewall was back up again.

Read the original here:
Chinese get past censors and onto Facebook, YouTube, Twitter