Macbeth

An Investigation into the Death Of King Duncan

Requested by: Macduff

ABSTRACT:

The purpose of this report was to determine the identity of King Duncan’s murderer. This was achieved through the interrogation of five key witnesses who saw firsthand exactly what happened on the night of the murder.

Enormous amounts of manpower went into the completion of this report, and in the end one fact became clear: Macbeth and His Lady conspired to murder King Duncan. They were motivated to commit this crime for one simple reason: ambition. They both wanted the throne of Scotland.  

It is the recommendation of this report that Lord and Lady Macbeth be executed for their crimes against the Royal Family of Scotland. 

TABLE OF CONTENTS:

1.0  INTRODUCTION

            1.1 Background of the Study

            1.2 Purpose of the Study

            1.3 Scope of the Study

2.0  DISCUSSION                                            

2.1  Evidence                                          

2.1.1        Autopsy                         

                        2.1.2   Forensic investigations   

2.1.3   Interviews                    

3.0 CONCLUSIONS………………                

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS………..          

5.0  APPENDICES                                            

6.0  BIBLIOGRAPHY…………...…..        

1.0       INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO STUDY:

At 8:00am on the 16^th of October, King Duncan was found dead in his chambers at Castle Inverness. The chain of events that led up to this began the evening before when King Duncan arrived at Macbeth’s castle to celebrate Macbeth’s promotion and His victory over the invading Irish and Norwegians.

That night, the party ran until 11:00pm, when the festivities ended and the King retired to his chambers with two guards stationed outside. The following morning King Duncan and his guards were found dead by Macduff.

1.2  PURPOSE:

This report has been commissioned by Macduff due to the violent nature of King Duncan’s death. Macduff feels it is necessary that the culprit be brought to justice.

1.3 SCOPE:

An examination of various forms of evidence has taken place to determine, beyond reasonable doubt, just who the murderer is. This evidence included the autopsy on King Duncan and his guard’s bodies, as well as forensic evidence gathered from the scene of the crime. In addition, numerous sources and witnesses were examined and cross-examined. From such evidence, deductions will be made and recommendations given regarding the identity and motive of the murderer(s). 

2.0       DISCUSSION

         2.1          Evidence

2.1.1       Autopsy

2.1.1.1 King Duncan’s Body

The results of the autopsy concluded that the victim was stabbed multiple times by a sharp object. The cause of death was attributed to the severing of the superior vena cava, which resulted in the victim bleeding to death. In total, eight stab wounds were detected, seven around the sternum and the eighth to the windpipe. (See Appendix A) Silicone moulds cast in the wounds identified that two similar murder-weapons were used in the attack owing to the striations of the blades. From the incisions on the body, the murder-weapons respectively measure fifteen and seventeen centimetres, and were both four centimetres wide. Bruising was observed on the victim’s shoulder. Through algor mortis, the approximate time of death was between 11:00pm and 12:00am, and the toxicology analysis reveals Duncan had twice the legal limit of alcohol in his system. Finally an examination of the victim’s brain found a large, malignant tumour at an advanced stage. 

2.1.1.2 William Turner and Samuel Little  (King Duncan’s Guards)

The autopsies on the bodyguards of the victim reveal that they were hacked to death at approximately 8:00am. The suspected murder weapon for both victims is believed to be a sharp object approximately five foot long. The toxicology analysis identified the presence of benzodiazepines; a well know sleep inducing drug which is commonly found in the nightshade plant.

2.1.2   Forensic Investigations

2.1.2.1 Fingerprints

Five fingerprints on the victim’s right shoulder were found and identified. (See Appendix B) Although the prints were latent, three of the prints could be clearly identified as belonging to Macbeth. Macbeth’s fingerprints were also found imprinted on blood on the hallway leading from the King’s room to his own. The two daggers involved in the murder were found next to the guards they had both theirs and Macbeth’s fingerprints on them.

2.1.2.2 Blood Spatter Patterns

The quantity of blood, angle of impact and the position of the spatter indicate that an individual standing over the victim administered the weapon utilized in the murder in a downward motion.

2.1.2.3 Skin Scrapings

Skin scrapings were detected underneath the victim’s fingernails, confirming a struggle with the murderer had occurred. The DNA from the sample (See Appendix C) was found to be consistent with Macbeth’s DNA strand.

2.1.2.4 Fibre Samples

Analysis of the crime scene has resulted in the discovery of a large number of fibres, deemed to be natural because of the shape and colour. The fibres match those of the bearskin coat Macbeth was seen wearing at the party, on the night of the murder.

2.1.2.5 Hair Samples

Strands of hair were retrieved from the victim’s body and once examined were seen to still contain follicle tissue caused by the hair being pulled out. These hairs were found to match those of Macbeth. (See Appendix D)

2.1.2.6 Serum Samples

Fluid stains were found on the back of King Duncan’s robe. These were swabbed and analysed. The results concluded that the stains were from saliva that matched those swabbed from Macbeth.

2.1.2.7 Blade Striations

The two blades involved in the murder match the daggers owned by the king’s guards. The unique striations on the blades matched the silicane casts made in the wounds. (See Appendix F) King Duncan’s blood was identified on the blades, as well as three sets of fingerprints matching those of the guards and Macbeth. (See Appendix B)

2.1.2.8 Well Water

Phenolphthalein confirmed the presence of blood in the water of the castle’s well. Unfortunately, the water had eliminated any fingerprints that may have occurred.

2.1.3   Interviews               

                       

                        2.1.3.1 Banquo

During the interview, Banquo was clearly distressed. He stated that he was with his son the whole night. His version of events on the night of the murder consisted of observing Macbeth and Lady Macbeth arguing at the party. However, he did not think much of it as he stated “Lady Macbeth always did have a wicked tongue.” Banquo also stated that he met Macbeth wondering around the castle shortly before the approximate time of the murder. Banquo recalled saying to Macbeth: “What, sir, not yet at rest?’ He did not think much of it except Macbeth mentioned how he was thinking about a prophecy he had heard earlier; that said he would be King. Banquo when quizzed recalled also recalled that at the time, Macbeth was wearing a bearskin coat. 

                        2.1.3.2 Lady Macbeth

Lady Macbeth was obviously agitated and nervous. She stated that her alibi was her husband who, as she stated; “had been with me the whole night.” When queried about why she and her husband were arguing at the party on the night, she replied that it was because “I was worried that the food and wine supplies were running low” When confronted with the fact that this was simply untrue, as there were enormous quantities of food (which she had ordered as befits her role as hostess) and liquor remaining, Lady Macbeth changed her story and instead stated that they were arguing because “Macbeth wanted an heir and I refused to be burdened with bearing Him a child.” When asked why she did not state this in the first place, she hesitated, and then claimed it was because she was embarrassed.

Lady Macbeth was also asked if she and her husband stayed in their chambers for the whole night after the party. She replied that she and her husband had been so exhausted that they had gone straight to bed. When asked if she or her husband visited the castle well in the middle of the night, she turned pale, before replying no. Lady Macbeth’s attorney then suspended the interview on the grounds of his client’s health.   

2.1.3.6 Belinda Lancaster – Maidservant to Lady Macbeth

Miss Lancaster was serving Lady Macbeth mere hours before King Duncan’s doomed arrival at Macbeth’s castle. She was folding a quilt, when Macbeth burst into the room and exclaimed “My dearest love, Duncan comes here tonight.” She then recalled how Lady Macbeth motioned for her to leave, but Miss Lancaster stated that “I only stepped just outside the doorway, so I could continue folding laundry when my Lord and Lady were gone.” She then heard Lady Macbeth say to her husband “And when does he leave?” Macbeth then replied “Tomorrow.” Lady Macbeth then whispered to Macbeth “Never shall that morrow come.” Miss Lancaster was then quizzed as to why she had not reported this to the authorities, to which she replied that “I had convinced myself that I had misheard my Lady.”

2.1.3.6 Clara Jane – Kitchen Maid

Miss Jane was clearly fretful and apprehensive, and stated that on the night of the murder she had been clearing the table in the grand hall where the party had been held earlier that night. She stated that she saw Macbeth enter the grand hall. For some reason Macbeth failed to notice her, and she clearly heard him say “Is this a dagger which I see before me?” She noted that Macbeth seemed intent on area of empty space just ahead of him. As Macbeth exited the hall, she heard him murmur “it is the bloody business which informs.” She then stammered “does this mean that Lord Macbeth had something to do with the murder of King Duncan?”

                                    

2.1.3.4 John Liberty - Night Watchman

Mr. Liberty was on watch duty on the night of the murder. He stated “I was making my rounds which included watching the castle’s water supply.” As Mr. Liberty passed the main castle well, he remarked about his surprise upon observing “my Lord and Ladyship beside the well at the ungodly hour of 12:00am in the morning.” He then testified how after Lady Macbeth left, “Macbeth drew water from the well, and whilst washing himself, peeled off his bearskin cloak and flung it in the well.”

3.0       CONCLUSIONS:

Based upon evidence gathered, the identity of the murderer of King Duncan is that of none other than Lord Macbeth. The main signifiers for evaluating this conclusion are: The murder time; which occurred between the hours of 11:00pm and 12:00am. Banquo stated how he had seen Macbeth wondering the castle between these hours. Also, several hours before the murder, Lady Macbeth’s maidservant overheard the couple conspiring to kill King Duncan. Finally, the Castle’s watchman observed Macbeth at the castle well, washing himself of Duncan’s blood after he had committed the crime.  

These witnessed accounts, coupled with the forensic evidence leaves no doubt as to whom the guilty party is: Macbeth and His Lady. This evil duo conspired to kill King Duncan as he slept. Lady Macbeth, who spiked the drinks of King Duncan’s bodyguards at the party, set the elaborate plot in motion. With his guards fast asleep, Duncan lay helpless before Macbeth, who had sneaked into his chambers via the great hall where he was seen by both Banquo and a maidservant. With the two daggers Macbeth had plundered from Duncan’s unconscious guards, Macbeth stabbed Duncan eight times. In the ensuing struggle, Macbeth accidentally left several crucial pieces of forensic evidence behind which have been used to pin the murder on him. 

So what was Macbeth’s motive? Why would he kill the man who for years had been like a father to him? Ambition was the reason. Macbeth was not content playing second fiddle to King Duncan, and then his son. He believed that it was his right to take power for himself, which he did. 

4.0       RECOMMENDATIONS

With Duncan dead, and His son’s whereabouts unknown, it seems likely that the crown will fall to Macbeth, the only other major power in the land at the moment. As it is the findings of this report that Macbeth is a murderer, it is recommended that the following actions be taken:

ü  Macbeth’s inauguration ceremony must be postponed indefinitely until formal charges can be laid against him;

ü  Macbeth must be arrested and charged with the wilful murder of King Duncan and both his guards. The findings of this report must then be used in order to ensure a conviction;

ü   Lady Macbeth must be arrested for conspiring with her husband to kill King Duncan.

ü  They must then be punished under the High Treason Act, sections 11B, and paragraphs 17–19; which states that an individual who conspires to kill Scotland’s Head of State must be hung by the neck until he is dead. He must then be drawn a quartered. Lady Macbeth must be burnt alive at the stake, as is the textbook punishment for woman in this day and age.

Appendices

Appendix A: King Duncan’s Body

Appendix B: Fingerprints From The Crime Scene

Appendix C: Skin Sample

Appendix D: Hair Samples

Appendix E: The Murder Weapons

Bibliography

Shakespeare, W. (1986). Macbeth. London : MACMILLAN

Coville, B (1997). William Shakespeare’s Macbeth. New York : Dial Books

Animal Farm Essay

"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face – for ever." These famous words were stated by George Orwell himself and acutely reflect his view of human nature. He represented this view throughout Animal Farm because, by the time that Orwell had written the novel at the end of 1944, he had seen firsthand the atrocities that mankind inflicted upon his brothers. Because of this, it is possible that Orwell could have written Animal Farm as a warning for future generations who might be tempted by the ideals of Communism – ideals that Orwell had seen go horribly astray during the Spanish civil war, and before that, in the Russian revolution. Therefore, when Orwell wrote Animal farm, he decided to write it with multiple layers of meaning, by enlisting powerful literary agents to position his audience to accept his views. These agents included fable, cultural assumptions, allegory and satire. The first of these: fable was used to convey a moral subtly across to the audience. 

Although Animal Farm appears to be written in a simple way, the message or moral behind this fable still holds relevance today, fifty years later. Orwell has told his story as a fable by using animals that speak and act like humans. The moral behind Animal Farm is then discovered by the reader through the animal’s actions and the consequences of these actions. Orwell demonstrates his skill with writing in the literary style of fable in Animal Farm when he writes this comment made by a human farmer upon inspecting Animal Farm, of which the pigs were now in charge: …He believed he was right in saying that the lower animals on Animal Farm did more work and received less food than any other animals in the country... (Pp92) The moral that Orwell was trying to get through was that although revolutions were meant to serve the interests of the people, instead they often ended up suffering even more than before, because their leaders fought to make themselves just as powerful and wealthy as the very people that they had despised before the revolution. In Animal Farm, the pigs are given the role of leaders because of the common cultural assumptions of pigs in Western society. 

By effectively utilizing cultural assumptions, Orwell was able to position the reader so that he or she could interpret the character’s personalities and emotions. By exploiting these common cultural assumptions, Orwell was able to limit the amount of explaining he had to do and as a result the storyline was able to progress much more quickly, thus increasing the interest of Animal Farm to its readers. An example of how Orwell uses this literary device to position his audience to accept his point of view is when he presents the cultural assumption that pigs are more intelligent and thus hold higher status than any other animal. This is demonstrated when Orwell writes: …The… next day the pigs who were supervising the work of the farm all carried whips in their trotters… [and] Napoleon was seen strolling in the farmhouse garden… [wearing] a black coat and ratcatcher breaches and leather leggings… (Pp90) This cultural assumption is further reinforced when the pigs change the most fundamental law of Animalism: All animals are equal, (Pp15) to: All animals are equal but some animals are more equal than others. (Pp90) Orwell’s writing approach is consistent with the Western cultural assumption of pigs because although they are regarded as intelligent, they are also perceived as lazy and greedy. By adapting his novel to encompass sections that reflected the stereotypes and attitudes of people in Western culture towards animals and people, Orwell ensured that people would more readily accept sections of the novel that are little more than his opinion; as fact. Orwell has also applied this approach to other sections of his novel that are allegory to real events that have occurred, such as the Russian revolution. 

Allegory was used by Orwell to form the backbone of his novel, and therefore position the reader to accept the sequence of allusions that Orwell compiles as a factual description of Communism. In the case of Animal Farm, these allusions are designed to tell the story of the Russian revolution; from the betrayal of its ideals by Stalin and his acolytes, to the eventual exploitation of the common people which made life much worse than before for all but a select few. This is demonstrated in the novel when Napoleon uses the dogs he has trained, as henchmen to inspire fear and ensure the obedience of the animals: …Napoleon now called upon them to confess their crimes… Without any further prompting they confessed… and… when they had finished their confession the dogs promptly tore their throats out… (Pp56) The dog’s real life counterparts during the Russia revolution were the KGB or secret police that forced support for the Russian leader Stalin. Like the dogs of Animal Farm, the KGB were given licence to use lethal force upon anyone they viewed to be against their ideals. As a result of the fear inspired by the KGB, few Russians dared to object to the countless promises that were broken once Stalin was in power, just like in animal farm, where Orwell has used satire to express the broken promises of the pigs. 

Orwell’s use of satirical indignation in Animal Farm; at the expense of communism, is just another example of the skilful manipulation of the literary codes that Orwell employed to construct his novel to influence his audience’s viewpoints. Although satire is often employed as a literary device to offer almost comic relief to a story; whilst retaining a moral, Orwell’s use of satire in this novel is almost entirely made up of black humour and hypocrisy, and this reflects his overall stance on Communism. An example from Animal Farm that reflects Orwell’s skill at utilizing the literary device of satire occurs when Boxer; the faithful and hardworking, yet not overly intelligent horse becomes ill after a work accident: …Comrade Napoleon… was already making arrangements to send boxer to be treated in hospital… [After] two days… a large closed van, drawn by two horses, with lettering on its side… [appeared] in the yard… The animals crowded around the van. “Goodbye Boxer” they chorused… “Fools! Fools!” shouted Benjamin… “do you not see what is written on the side of the van?… They are taking Boxer to the knacker’s!…” (Pp80-82) This section of animal farm can be attributed as satire because of the blatant hypocrisy of the pigs; because when Boxer ceases to being an asset to them, and starts to look as though he may even become a burden, the pigs have him sold to the humans to be killed and made into glue and dog food - not exactly the peaceful retirement that the pigs had been promising the animals when they became too old or weak to work. With the money gained from the sale of Boxer’s life, the pigs were able to buy a case of whiskey, thus increasing the irony of the situation by breaking one of the seven fundamental laws of Animalism that states: No animal shall drink alcohol. (Pp15) By using satire, Orwell has ensured that his audience understands the irony of Communism; where everyone is equal, yet some people are more equal and therefore more powerful than others; in order to be able to enforce this maxim.

Throughout Animal Farm, Orwell expressed his cynical view towards Communism with the use of literary devices that included fable, cultural assumptions, allegory and satire. These positioning agents were used and manipulated to position Orwell’s readers to accept his views and opinions as fact. It is because of his great skill at doing this, that Animal Farm – a plain, though powerful and passionate fable; has been often credited as what made Orwell the most powerful and influential British novelist of his day.

Poem Deconstruction English Speech

It has been said that most people ignore most poems because most poems ignore most people. Good morning students and my fellow teachers. Before I begin I would like it to be known that I had constantly in my mind what a great honour it is for me to be standing here before you; the purpose for which I will now disclose. As many of you are no doubt aware, there has been a great deal of controversy in the media of late over Australia’s multicultural policies and the assimilation of migrants into mainstream Australian society. Many politicians with their own agendas to push are calling for migrants to conform to vague notions of “having a go” and being a “true-blue Aussie.” Yet these so-called definitions raise even more questions about the Australian identity. After all, what is it that so plainly distinguishes your typical Australian from your average Pom? What attitudes, values or beliefs have contributed to the way Australian culture is interpreted? As John Menadue; an Australian public servant remarks on his website: “We have demanded outsiders conform to ‘Australian’ culture even as each migrant wave has expanded what Australian culture means.” Even today’s so-called Australian culture has only been in existance in the last 200 years and yet its discourses have always been represented as standard. Nowhere are the sterotypes of this discourse more evident than in the bush poetry of the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

These obviously white, male poets were notorious in their marginalization and often silencing of ethnic and religious groups that failed to fit the mould. Rarely, when these groups were mentioned they were often constructed in a profoundly negative and stereotypical way. Take for example the Chinese gold-diggers of the late 19th century, who despite enduring the same hardships as other European immigrants, were often constructed as immoral and thieving individuals simply because of their success. If only our European forefathers had embraced our cultural identity rather than shunned it – perhaps we would not have the moral panic that we have today. As John Menadue observed on his website “Cultural diversity has enriched Australia, not diminished or undermined its cohesion.” This brings me back to the bush poets of yesteryear, who either through blatant ignorance or prejudice towards Australia’s many ethnic groups have stereotyped, marginalized and in many cases omitted mention of these groups of individuals who made as much a contribution to Australian society as any Anglo-Celtic.

As testimony to this fact, I will now deconstruct a poem by the legendary bush poet Banjo Paterson; titled “We’re all Australians now.” I have selected this poem as, in my opinion; you would be hard pressed to find a piece of literature which better represents the values and opinions of Anglo-Celtic Australians than this one. By taking an in-depth view of this poem, we can begin to comprehend just how the Australian identity came about.

To do this, I will critically examine four of the main values constructed in this poem as crucial aspects of the Australian identity. However in order to do this we must first understand a little about this poem.

“We’re all Australians now” was written in 1915 and was sent to Australians serving abroad in the armed forces. As the subject matter is developed across the stanzas, the tone of the poem tends to play on the young men’s patriotism as well as their spirit of mateship. This continues to such an extent that the poem becomes almost blatant propaganda.

Banjo Paterson utilized many literary devices in the creation of this poem; including personification, similes and symbolism. These factors all contributed to the overall effect of the poem, yet under critical observation it becomes apparent that the poem only mobilizes one discourse of Australian society, and blatantly ignores many others. For a poem that boasts that “we are all Australian now,” somehow, like in so many cases, women are blatantly disregarded. Asian and Indigenous Australians are also marginalized to a great degree. I find this particular point extremely condescending of the Asian and Aboriginal men who fought and died for Australia, for were this poem to be taken at its word, they were still not worthy of being regarded Australian.

In this presentation, I will scrutinize how these particular values are mobilized through the dominant discourse portrayed in the poem. I will also examine the historical perspective of the text and the cultural knowledge entailed in understanding the poem. Finally I will regard which voice is foregrounded in the text and the ideology that is drawn upon and supported.

The four values that I will be scrutinizing in this speech will be:

1. Mateship and Unity

2. Courage and convictions

3. Patriotism

4. Freedom and democracy

When Henry Parks declared on Federation: “The crimson thread of kinship runs through us all,” today we would have automatically assumed that he was denoting Australians in general. Yet taken in the context of the day; kinship, or mateship as it was otherwise known, was “fairly exclusive of woman, aborigines and Australians of non-British origin;” as the Sunshine Coast Daily puts it. Throughout Banjo Paterson’s poem, the value of mateship is valorized several times. Nowhere is this more evident than in the 2nd stanza, where the poet writes how men from far out Queensland are “fighting side by side with some Tasmanian farmer’s sons.” The discourse of the typical Australian is based on these fundamental ideals of mateship and unity which have become part of an obviously male dominated discourse of Australian identity. It is the masculinity of this discourse that Banjo Paterson has so skillfully positioned his audience to believe an essential part of the Australian identity.

The courage and convictions of Australian folk has long been acknowledged and respected worldwide. As Jill Kitson explains in her article on Australian identity, “the rest of the world sees the typical Australian as a rugged, sun bronzed laconic man from the bush.” This value has long been associated with the stereotyped harsh Australian way of life and has, among other things, been foregrounded in this poem. This becomes evident in the 9th stanza, where it is written: “The honoured graves beneath the crest of Gaba Tepe hill, may hold our bravest and our best, but we have brave men still.” The cultural understanding that is being mobilized here positions the audience to accept that being brave and accepting death are just another part of the great Australian discourse.

It has been said that “patriotism is a lively sense of collective responsibility while nationalism is a silly cock crowing on its own dunghill.” It is my belief that this statement acutely reflects the difference between Australia and England – at least at the beginning of the 20th century. The perception at this time, was that Australians prized mateship above all else, whereas in England nationalism had reached fever point, but then; the United Kingdom did have a much longer history than Australia. Banjo Paterson plays on the young Australian soldier’s patriotism in this poem through the use of the literary device personification. This becomes evident in the 6th stanza where he wrote: “Our six-starred flag that used to fly, half-shyly in the breeze.” The literary device of symbolism is also utilized in the final stanza: “And with Australia’s flag shall fly a spray of wattle bough.” The value of patriotism makes up an important part of the Australian identity because it gives the nation a sense of responsibility in times of hardship.

Finally, the Australian love of freedom and democracy has formed a central part of the Australian identity. The right to express our views through freedom of speech has and remains a crucial part of the Australian discourse. Banjo Paterson recognizes and reflects this in the 13th stanza when he wrote: “Fight on, fight on, unflinchingly, till right and justice reign.” This adds yet another dimension to the discourse of the typical Australian by constructing him almost as a guardian of peace and justice.

Were Banjo Paterson’s poem taken at face value, then its ideas on the “typical” Australian would be considered rather one sided. The values portrayed consistently tie in with those of the stereotyped Australian discourse and it is for this reason that I have objected to Banjo Paterson’s interpretation of Australian culture throughout this presentation. The one thing that I can concur with is that Australia’s identity truly is a work in progress and while multicultural debates are clouded by religion, racism and illiteracy, nothing will be resolved.

Documentry Review Article

Deceitful Documentary Denies Holocaust 

“The broad mass of a nation will more easily fall victim to a big lie rather than a small one.” These words, uttered by the infamous German leader Adolf Hitler, are now being put to the test more than sixty years on in modern day Iran. There the Iranian government is funding the creation of racist and inflammatory documentaries, such as Merchants of the Myth, which attack the validity of the Holocaust. 

Last weekend, I had the distinct displeasure of viewing this pejorative program, which aired on Iranian TV, illustrating the lengths that a deceitful director will go to position his audience towards accepting his warped view of reality. The documentary’s argument is black and white – believe the Holocaust to be a Jewish conspiracy to occupy Palestine or be an ignoramus, corrupted by the morally bankrupt West, under the control of powerful Jews. “Today 70% of the press is in the hands...” is the narrator’s dire warning. 

“How silly of me!” I gently chide myself. “Obviously it’s the Jews who are the racists.” Bah! Personally I will play no part in this idiotic Islamic indoctrination. For a documentary sanctioned by the Iranian government it seems strange to me that no production credits were forthcoming. Evidently no-one wanted to lend their name to a work which so grotesquely misrepresented the truth. 

Of course I know that even at the best of times, documentaries are merely a representation of the truth – a construction of the director’s views and opinions. Yet the last time I saw such a blatant manipulation of the truth was when we last had a Labor PM. At least we could vote him out of office! 

I mean after all, the Holocaust is one of the most well-documented events in history – even its survivors are still alive today. Survivors like Ben Stem, who can still recall his first moments in the death camp “The people sent to the left went to the gas chambers, and we went to the right.” Yet all this is silenced or constantly negated throughout the documentary by so-called experts such as Professor Robert Faurisson or by the narrator himself, with his trademark remark “Any discerning viewer with a historical curiosity can easily identify the exaggerations in the film.” 

In fact, you have to hand it to the narrator for his ability to put a spin on the truth as well as Shane Warne can put a spin on a cricket ball. His dry, slightly condescending tone, so often attributed to academics and scholars, works to position his audience towards accepting his version of reality as fact. Yet all the while he is launching a blatant attack against Zionism and the authenticity of the state of Israel. 

Unfortunately, this form of racism isn’t limited to just Iran. The other day I was surfing the net, (as part of my daily ritual of pre-work procrastination) and to my astonishment found hundreds of videos glorifying National Socialism, using footage from the Third Reich. There were also thousands of websites disputing the validity of the Holocaust, such as those established by David Irving, the renown Holocaust denier who has written numerous books on the topic. 

With such information on the net, you would have thought the producers of Merchants of the Myth would have easily found some dubious source to corroborate their findings. Yet strangely enough, none of the information referred to in the documentary is acknowledged or attributed to any sources. The narrator simply says “According to documents obtained.” I find it difficult to believe that anyone could be ignorant enough to accept the insidious insinuations of this documentary without a shred of evidence. 

The process of deliberate misinformation continued into the documentary’s interviews, where the interviewees were constructed as venerable and wise men. Their names were displayed along with vague credentials, such as Professor Robert Faurisson who was classified as a “French Revisionist Historian.” All the while throughout his interview the camera remained focused in a close up shot of his upper-body as if to show he had nothing to hide. 

Even the grainy file footage shot by the British themselves of the concentration camps is manipulated for use as evidence. “It is obvious that these were not cremators, but merely resting rooms,” is a typical explanation. The background music also seems to have been specifically chosen because of its grave and somber nature, as though the director is struggling to right some great wrong. 

Merchants of the Myth is nothing more than a cleverly presented piece of racist fiction. They speak of the Holocaust as a lie, yet they try to prove this by lying and manipulating the truth themselves. To the uneducated masses, this documentary might successfully position them towards accepting the director’s constructed version of history. However, it is inconceivable that it would convince an educated and intelligent individual, and in that regard, in the eyes of the wider global community, it has failed as a documentary. For, no matter how painful the past is, it must always be accurately recorded, for as the writer George Santayana inscribed “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”

Journalist Code of Ethics Report

ABSTRACT: 

This report was commissioned by the Australian Journalist’s Association to evaluate the effectiveness of the Code of Ethics as a means for maintaining standards for the reporting of news. This was achieved in the Discussion through an analysis of two reports covering the same news story. The news story was on the Indian cricket tour of Australian and the reports were: “TOUR HIT FOR SIX”, by Jon Pierik, published by the Courier Mail on the 8^th of January 2008, and “Indian cricket tour in doubt as a nation erupts in fury” by Alex Brown that was published by The Age on the same date. The reports were analysed and judged according to the contemporary language theory and from the evidence in the Discussion, the report concluded that the Code of Ethics was a flawed and ineffective guideline for the journalistic profession. Based on these conclusions the report recommended that amendments be made to the Code in terms of language choices and disciplinary action.

1.0  INTRODUCTION

            1.1 Background of the Study

            1.2 Purpose of the Study

            1.3 Scope of the Study

2.0  DISCUSSION

2.1 Selection of Language

            2.2 Selection of Context

            2.3 Organisation of Material

3.0 CONCLUSIONS

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

5.0 REFERENCE LIST

6.0  BIBLIOGRAPHY

7.0  APPENDIX

1.0  INTRODUCTION

1.1 BACKGROUND TO STUDY:    

The notion of a journalistic Code of Ethics in Australia was first proposed by the renowned war historian C.E.W Bean in 1932. Bean felt that to guarantee the integrity of the profession, it was necessary that a “Code of Honour” be enforced amongst journalists.  This was intended to ensure that responsible and honest journalism would be adhered to by the media. For “if the public becomes convinced that journalism will not accept accountability… then gradually the media will be perceived as illegitimate, as lacking credibility, [and] as being unworthy of trust.” (Chadwick, P. 1999)  Despite considerable opposition by union executive members from the Australian Journalist’s Association, the Code was finally implemented in 1944.

           

The original 1944 Code of Ethics (Appendix A) was a simple document of a mere eight clauses that has since been adapted twice to cater for the needs and expectations of a rapidly changing society. These revisions of the Code, first made in 1984 (Appendix B) and more recently modified in 1996, (Appendix C) have sparked criticism due to their increasingly abstract and complex natures. Questions have been raised in regards to the viability of their application in modern media outlets, and its ability to effectively maintain the standards for the reporting of news. For, while justified changes have been made to the Code, such as the removal of racist and sexist notation, it still appears that with each adaptation of the Code, the definitions of truth, accuracy and fairness continue to become even more vague and indistinct.

Despite this ambiguity, the Code of Ethics’ power resides in its ability to bring members of the Australian Journalist’s Association before a tribunal by their colleagues, if it is believed that they have breached the Code. Members of the public “can lodge a complaint with the Judiciary Committee”, (Australian News Commentary. 2006) should they feel that a journalist has grossly misled them in an article. However, only members of the union are predisposed to undergo disciplinary action, as other journalists have not accepted the Code, and therefore cannot be held liable for their actions by the Australian Journalist’s Association.

The Code of Ethics that the Australian Journalist’s Association decided upon was based on a moralistic platform of inherent beliefs and values, which manifest themselves in the three basic concepts of truth, objectivity and fairness. These formed the “foundation on which its specific ethical requirements are based.” (Allen, M. 2001) This view becomes evident in the Code through the use of language utilizing terms such as “report and interpret honestly” and “use fair, responsible and honest means.” The Code is intended to act as a guide for the profession to protect the integrity of its members, and preserve the public’s faith in the validity of their work.

Although the language choices mobilized in the original Code of Ethics maintain that the duty of a reporter is to “report and interpret news with scrupulous honesty,” modern literary theories hold the view that it is impossible for a text to be completely neutral. The contemporary language theory asserts that the language of an author will always reflect on his social and cultural experiences. For, while news reports are taken to be a mirror image of real life, events are actually “filtered through the author’s consciousness.” (Queensland Studies Authority. 2004) Inevitably, the language choices that the author makes will determine which discourses and cultural assumptions in the text are mobilised, while others are marginalised or silenced. Since a “text is made out of fragments surrounded by blanks or gaps, readers are encouraged to fill in these gaps according to the prompts established by the text.” (Queensland Studies Authority. 2004) Therefore representations are partial and limited, benefiting certain individuals and disadvantaging others. The Code of Ethics of today needs to reflect on this dilemma, and refine its stance on how the truth should be consciously represented by the author.

1.2  PURPOSE:

The Australian Journalist’s Association has called for an appraisal into the viability of the Code of Ethics. The Code’s ability to act as an effective means of maintaining standards for the reporting of news is currently under scrutiny. The efficiency of the Code is under analysis based upon today’s contemporary language theories, and from these, recommendations for amendments to the Code will be expressed throughout this report. 

1.3 SCOPE:

The effectiveness of the Code of Ethics, including the notions of truth, objectivity and fairness as a moral guide for journalists will be evaluated using the contemporary language theory as the basis for this report. Journalist’s manipulation of textual features, such as silences and cultural assumptions to position their audience and so represent or misrepresent individuals or events will be assessed throughout this report.

To evaluate the efficiency of the current Code of Ethics, two similar newspaper articles will be compared and scrutinised against one another using the Code as a means to analyse the integrity of the author. Specifically, clauses I, II and IV of the Code will be focused on in the discussion under the headings of: Selection of Language, Selection of Context and Organisation of Material. These clauses are vital when trying to assess the viability of the Code in regard to the limitations that they place upon journalism. These limitations impact upon the journalist’s ability to mobilise discourses amongst the public owing to their language choices. From the evidence scrutinised from the texts in this report, conclusions will be drawn and recommendations made.

2.O DISCUSSION

Preamble:

The assumption underpinning the Code of Ethics that it is possible to report the truth in all its accuracy is problematic according to the contemporary language theory. This theory asserts that a text is never neutral as it merely presents a particular version of reality that is both partial and limited. There is no such thing as a foundational truth or reality; rather there is simply a variety of interpretations of an event. The concept of truth becomes even more ambiguous when the elusive nature of language is considered. Different interpretations of the text mobilise particular cultural assumptions amongst readers, and encourage the support of different value systems. When these factors are considered, it is evident that the guiding principles of the Code are flawed, undermining its effectiveness as a means for maintaining standards for the reporting of news. In particular, the ability of the journalist to position the reader through their choices for language selection, context and organisation will be investigated using two articles relating to the Indian Cricket Tour of Australia. The first article, (Article 1) written by Jon Pierik, was published by the Courier Mail on the 8^th of January 2008, and was entitled “TOUR HIT FOR SIX”. The alternate article (Article 2) was published by The Age on the same date and was entitled “Indian cricket tour in doubt as a nation erupts in fury” by Alex Brown.

2.1    Selection of Language:

The language choices utilized in a text mobilise certain discourses and the cultural assumptions associated with them, and marginalise or silence others. Journalists determine truth in their reporting through their language choices, which construct the text and are inexorably connected to cultural assumptions and values systems which serve the interests of some people and not others.

            2.1.1 Article 1:

Harbhajan Singh, the Indian player accused of racially abusing the Australian cricketer Andrew Symonds was labelled as the “star” of the Indian cricket team.  The cultural assumption encoded in this label positions the reader to believe that Singh is an essential player for India. In contrast, Symonds is constructed as “the only black man in the Australian side”. This label mobilises the discourse of racism, and privileges the view that Andrew Symonds has been singled out for being the “only black man”, which encourages the reader to sympathise with him. Singh is defended by the Indian Cricket Council, which threatens to cancel the Indian tour of Australian unless the charges against him are revoked. Utilizing figurative language, the article represents the Indian Cricket Council as “dramatically holding world cricket to ransom”. This mobilises the discourse of India hijacking the series because of “Harbhajan’s punishment”. The language choices in the article silence other discourses offering alternate representations of the event. The Australian Cricket Board is described as having “attempted to initiate peace talks”, which mobilises the discourse of Australia generously working to appease the Indians. While the value system encouraged by this discourse benefits the Australians, it also disadvantages the Indians.

            2.1.2 Article 2:

The language choices utilized by the journalist in this article labelled the Indian Cricket Board as “incensed” and “discontent”. These verbs and adjectives were used to signal the preferred way for the reader to think about this participant’s feelings of anger and frustration over the issue. The reason for this discontent was attributed to the “ban on Harbhajan for allegedly calling Andrew Symonds a monkey”. The journalist’s decision to use the adverb “allegedly” encourages the reader to accept that the incident is nothing more than an unproven insinuation. This mobilises the discourse of a miscarriage of justice, because the player was banned for an incident that was nothing more than a “blatantly false and unfair slur on an Indian player”.  Despite Singh being found guilty of racial abuse by the match referee, the article did not label Singh as actually being guilty. This label and the cultural assumptions encoded within it were silenced as they would offer an alternate representation of the event that would be privilege the Australians. Instead he article states how the “integrity of the Australian players” has been called into question, which represents the Australian cricket team as being dishonest. This activates the cultural assumption of cheats and liars, which encourages the audience to accept that the Australians cricketers are not an honourable group. This view privileges the Indians, as it assesses how valid the verdict was when the match referee “took the word of Australia’s players over the Indians’ in handing down Harbhajan’s suspension”. Discourses offering alternate representations of the Australian players are silenced, and the audience is encouraged to ignore the prospect of the Australian players being good sports.

2.2       Selection of Context

The choices concerning the context of an article foregrounds aspects of the story and marginalises others by its placement in the newspaper, surrounding articles, headlines and pictures. This encourages the reader to adopt a certain a certain opinion about the issue, often before they have even examined the text itself.

            2.2.1 Article 1:

The front page of this newspaper was entirely dedicated to this article, in order to foreground its importance and draw the reader’s attention. The article’s title “TOUR HIT FOR SIX”, Is even larger than the name of the newspaper, and mobilises the cultural assumption through cricketing jargon that the tour has been placed in jeopardy. Composing almost the entire left hand side of the front page, alongside the title, is a large photo of the Indian Cricketer Harbhajan Singh, warily glancing over his shoulder with his bags. The caption below the photograph read: “Ban … Harbhajan Singh returns to the team hotel in Sydney yesterday”. By associating the word “ban” with this cricketer’s name, the reader is encouraged to mobilise the discourse of a banned sportsman. This view was reinforced in the text of the article, where it was stated that India had a “ban on one of its stars for racial abuse.”  The association between him being banned, and returning to his hotel privileges the view of his guilt instigating the end of the cricketing tour. The possibility of any other participants being responsible for the tour’s collapse is silenced. The reader is also positioned to attribute some of the blame to the Indian Cricket Council, for the symbol of this organisation on the front page has the statement “BOARD OF CONTROL FOR CRICKET IN INDIA” printed on it. The story continues over the next two pages of the newspaper, along with an opinion piece that states in large, bold font “ICC must stand firm over India’s blackmail tactics.” The proximity of this text to the main article foregrounds the Courier Mail’s discourse of India hijacking the series, and silences the alternate view that Australia is also responsible for the collapse of the series.

2.2.2 Article 2:

The title of this article utilizes large, bold font to foreground the issue and draw the reader’s attention. It states “Indian cricket tour in doubt as a nation erupts in fury”, Which mobilises the discourse of an entire country incensed with rage. The title omits to mention the actual country that has erupted in a fury, but this silence serves to entice the reader, as they are positioned to believe that an event of monumental importance has occurred. Underneath the title there is a large picture of the Indian cricketer Harbhajan Singh who is portrayed staring intently ahead while he is surrounded by a cluster of reporters. This privileges the view that he is at the centre of the controversy in this issue. Below the picture is a caption that states “Suspended Indian Spinner Harbhajan Singh leaves the team’s Sydney hotel”. This statement is emphasised through the literary technique of sibilance. An opinion piece situated next to the photo states in large font “Ponting ‘must be sacked’”, which positions the reader to accept the Australian cricket captain Ricky Ponting as the key agitator in this issue. The placement of this article at the centre of the front page of the newspaper foregrounds the importance this issue towards the reader. The articles surrounding it have attained less space, and their position at the bottom and side columns are less favourable. The continuation of the text over on the next page is assigned less importance, due to its position along the right hand side of the page, yet it is situated near another article which is in the centre of the page describing the Indian’s discontent with the match.

2.3       Organisation of Material

The choices for the organisation of material in an article can foreground or marginalise discourses and privilege certain values. The headline, order of information, length given to information and sentence juxtaposition all play a part in positioning the reader as they are encouraged to assign meaning based on the emphasis inherent in the text. The author’s manipulation of the placement of information in an article impacts on the position the reader is encouraged to adopt, and the discourses the reader is positioned to ignore.

            2.3.1 Articles 1:

The main emphasis of the article is the “what” factor, which negatively examines what India is doing to get its own way. This ties in with the Courier Mail’s discourse of India hijacking the cricket tour through an abuse of its power. The opening paragraph privileges the Australian cricket team as it negatively constructs the Indian Cricket Board as “threatening to abandon its half-completed tour”. This positions the reader to sympathise with the Australian Cricket Council, who as the body of the article goes on to elaborate, faces a “$50 million catastrophe thanks to India’s threat to abandon its tour.” By marginalising India’s reasons for bringing the tour into doubt, the article is able to construct the Indian Cricket Council as a despotic force in world cricket. This positions the reader to believe that India is responsible for placing the tour in jeopardy, thereby serving the interests of the Australian Cricket Council which is favourably represented. It is not until the end of the second page that the motives of the Indian Cricket Council are explained, thereby giving it the opportunity to mount a reply. It was stated how the Indians were enraged when one of its players was found guilty of racial abuse “despite there being no audio or visual evidence or third-party collaboration.” By positioning this information later in the article, the journalist was able to assign less importance to it to, thereby manipulating the reading that text offered. This is at odds with the final position offered in the article which emphasises how “India’s threat to abandon the Australian tour is not the first time they have held the game to ransom.”  This encourages the reader to view the influential Indian Cricket Board as manipulative and abusive of its power.

            2.3.2 Article 2:

The structure of the first paragraph utilized the who, what, when, where, why and how method to describe the contentious issue. Indian indignation over the controversial ban on one of its players was foregrounded, while the reasons for his suspension were marginalised. The opening paragraph stated how there was “an outpouring of fury across India.” This positioned the reader to believe that a grave injustice has occurred, which served the interests of the Indian Cricket Council by justifying their actions. The Indian’s were also privileged by the foregrounded material in body of the article, because the “why” question about their behaviour is developed. By focussing on the “Indian’s discontent”, the Indian threats to dissolve the tour are marginalised, which encourages the reader to accept that India’s actions are necessary to prevent a grave injustice occurring. The effect on the Australian Cricket Board in terms of monetary loss is marginalised as this would position the reader to accept an alternate reading of the text that would privilege the Australians. The final position offered to the audience in the last paragraph describes the Indian player’s final moments before the cancellation of the tour. This positions the reader to believe that the Indians were willing to honour their tour agreements before the situation became “totally unacceptable”, in the words of Sharad Pawar, the President of the Indian Cricket Board.

3.0 CONCLUSIONS:

The contemporary language theory was used to evaluate the effectiveness of the Code of Ethics as a means for maintaining standards for the reporting of news. This report scrutinized the constructs of two news reports on the Indian cricket tour of Australia. By examining the journalist’s selection of language, context and organization of material, it was possible to evaluate effectiveness of the Code. Due to the analysis made in the Discussion of this report, it was established that the current Code of Ethics is ineffective in its current form, due to its susceptibility to manipulation by journalists.

The selection of language by a journalist in an article mobilizes particular discourses which construct representations about the issue, while silencing other discourses offering alternate representations. Linked to these language choices are the cultural assumptions, beliefs and values which influence the reader’s interpretation of the text according to their social and cultural backgrounds. The contemporary language theory states that “Culture and individuals are constructed through networks of affiliated language, symbol and discourse usages”. This highlights how a journalist can use language to shape the representation of participants in an article, thereby manipulating the reading of the text. Point 2.1 of the Discussion analysed this notion, stating that “Journalists determine truth in their reporting through their language choices”. (Lye, J. 1993) This is at odds with the simplistic view on truth expressed in the preamble of the Code of Ethics, which states how “Respect for truth and the public’s right to information are fundamental principles of journalism.” (Appendix C) The Code does not take into account the complex and elusive nature of language, which “always means more than it may be taken to mean in any one context”. (Lye, J. 1993) This perspective is problematic for Clause I of the Code of Ethics, which maintains that journalists must “report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts.” (Appendix C) The concepts of truth, honesty and fairness upon which the Code bases itself are ambiguous because the meanings that readers make depend on the cultural assumptions that they draw on. However, the language that the author utilizes can manipulate the position the reader is invited to take up, by mobilizing discourses along with their associated cultural assumptions. This was examined in point 2.1.1 of the Discussion where it was deduced that “the cultural assumption encoded in this label positions the reader to believe that Singh is an essential player for India”. This demonstrates how the language choices of the author are able to close down and open up possibilities for the reader to think about the issue and the participants. The journalist is also able to manipulate the context of the article to construct representations which invite the audience to adopt a subjective position in relation to the text.

The conscious decisions of the journalist in regard to the context of the article foreground certain aspects of the story while marginalizing others. This is manipulated by the journalist to encourage the reader to adopt a certain opinion about the issue. As Clause IV of the Code of ethics states, “Do not allow personal interest, or any belief, commitment, payment, gift or benefit, to undermine your accuracy, fairness or independence”. (Appendix C) However according to the contemporary language theory, this is an unrealistic expectation as “an individual exists as a nexus of social meanings and practices, psychic and ideological forces, and uses of language and other signs and symbols.” (Lye, J. 1993) Therefore a journalist is merely a product of their cultural and social situation and they portray ideologies through their choices in the article. The preamble of the Discussion examined this dilemma, stating that the contemporary language theory “asserts that a text is never neutral as it merely presents a particular version of reality that is both partial and limited.” The choices of the journalist when structuring an article reflect their personal interests and beliefs, as they encourage the support of different value systems. The ability of a journalist to utilize the context of an article to position the reader was examined in point 2.2.2 of the Discussion, where it was stated that “An opinion piece situated next to the photo states in large font “Ponting ‘must be sacked’”, which positions the reader to accept the Australian cricket captain Ricky Ponting as the key agitator in this issue.” The belief of the journalist was reflected through his decisions for the context of the article. Another way that the journalist is able to manipulate the reading of a text is through the organisation of material in the article.

The organization of material in an article can be manipulated by the journalist to foreground or marginalize particular discourses and their associated cultural assumptions, which encourage the support of different value systems. This affects the way that the story is represented and the position that the audience is invited to take up. The Code of Ethics seeks to remedy this, by stating in Clause I “Do your utmost to give a fair opportunity for reply”, (Appendix C) which is intended to ensure fair reporting by journalists. This was examined in point 2.3.1 of the Discussion where it was established that “It is not until the end of the second page that the motives of the Indian Cricket Council are explained, thereby giving it the opportunity to mount a reply.” By positioning this information later in the article, the journalist was able to assign less importance and thereby marginalize this discourse offering an alternate representation of the participant. However, because of the inclusion of the word “utmost” in the Clause, the journalist was able to manipulate this instruction to suit his own purpose. Another gray area in the Code is where Clause II states “Do not place unnecessary emphasis on personal characteristics.” (Appendix C) Yet how is it possible to define emphasis on personal characteristics as “unnecessary”? It is simply left up to the discretion of the journalist. This was examined in point 2.1.1 of the discussion, where the issue of racism in the article was discussed: “This label mobilizes the discourse of racism, and privileges the view that Andrew Symonds has been singled out for being the “only black man”. The journalist emphasized the importance of this issue by foregrounding it at the beginning of the article.

In the light of contemporary language theories it is obvious that the current Code of Ethics is ineffective as its wording leaves too much to the discretion of the journalist. The notions of truth, objectivity and fairness, which form the foundation of the Code are ambiguous and flawed. The implementation of more stringent guidelines in the Code is required to ensure the ethical behaviour of the media, as well as firmer punishments for breaches of the Code. For, as the report that instigated the revision of the Code of Ethics in 1996 stated: “Journalists must learn to do ethics, not just enshrine them.” (Allen, M. 2001)

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS

The current Code of Ethics is merely an invitation for journalists to engage in ethical practices based upon their interpretation of the Code applied in specific circumstances. Based on the results of this investigation, it is recommended that less versatile language be utilized throughout the Code. The Australian Journalist’s Association Code of Ethics requires the introduction of more stringent guidelines to prevent breaches of the Code in order to maintain standards for the reporting of news.

This report recommends the following amendments to the Code of Ethics:

The removal of ambiguous language from the Code that is open to interpretation and manipulation by the journalist:

ü  The preamble of the Code should read: “Respect for the participants in a  story and the public’s right to information are fundamental principles of journalism.”

ü  Clause I should state “Report and interpret accurately from both perspectives of the story. Do not suppress facts or emphasise them. Give opportunity for reply.”

ü  Clause II of the Code should read: “Do not place emphasis on personal characteristics”

ü  Clause IV of the Code should state: “Do not allow personal ideologies to influence your accuracy.”

The introduction of more rigid enforcement of the Code of Ethics is required to promote high standards for the reporting of news. Stronger guidelines are required to deter journalists from constructing inaccurate representations in their reports.

It is the recommendation of this report that these changes to the Code of Ethics be implemented as quickly as possible.
 5.0 REFERENCE:

Allen, M. (2001). Ethics in the Media. Referenced 2008

from Source

Alliance Online.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

Australian Journalist’s Code of Ethics. (2006). (online)

Available: Source

Australian News Commentary. (2006). Journalists Code of ethics. Referenced 2008

from Source

Breit, Rhonda. (2005). Journalistic Self-Regulation. Referenced 2008
from Source

Chadwick, P. (1999). Media and Accountability. Referenced 2008

from Source

Ford, P. (2008). Coevolution of Language and Theory of Mind. Referenced 2008

from Source

Lye, J. (1993). Contemporary Literary Theory. Referenced 2008

from Source

Lye, J. (2000). Some Characteristics of Contemporary Theory. Referenced 2008

from Source

Queensland Studies Authority. (2004). Reader Centred Approaches. Referenced 2008

from Source

Spurgin, T. (1997). The New Criticism. Referenced 2008
from Source

6.0 BIBLIOGRAPHY:

Allen, M. (2001). Ethics in the Media. Referenced 2008

from Source

Alliance Online.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

Australian Journalist’s Code of Ethics.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

Australian News Commentary. (2006). Journalists Code of ethics. Referenced 2008

from Source

Chadwick, P. (1999). Media and Accountability. Referenced 2008

from Source

Queensland Studies Authority. (2004). Reader Centred Approaches. Referenced 2008

from Source

Lye, J. (1993). Contemporary Literary Theory. Referenced 2008

from Source

7.0

Appendix A

The 1944 AJA Code of Ethics

Source: Australian Journalist’s Code of Ethics.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

AJA Code of Ethics 1944
Each member of the Australian Journalists' Association is bound by its rules to observe this Code of Ethics in his employment: To report and interpret news with a scrupulous honesty. Not to suppress essential facts nor distort the truth by omission or wrong or improper emphasis. To respect all confidences received by him in the course of his calling. To observe at all times the fraternal obligations arising from his membership of the Association and not on any occasion to take unfair or improper advantage of a fellow member of the Association. Not to allow his personal interests to influence him in the discharge of his duties, nor to accept or offer any present, gift or consideration, or benefit or advantage of whatsoever kind that may have the effect of so benefiting him. To use only fair and honest means to obtain news, pictures and documents. Always to reveal his identity as a representative of the press before obtaining any personal interview for the purpose of using it for publication. To do his utmost to maintain full confidence in the integrity and dignity of the calling of a journalist.

Appendix B:

The 1984 AJA Code of Ethics

Source: Australian Journalist’s Code of Ethics.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

AJA Code of Ethics 1984-present : Current Code
Respect for truth and the public's right to know are overriding principles for all journalists. In pursuance of these principles journalists commit themselves to ethical and professional standards. All members of the AJA section engaged in gathering, transmitting, disseminating and commenting on news and information shall observe the following code of ethics in their professional activities. They acknowledge the jurisdiction of their professional colleagues in the AJA judiciary committees to adjudicate on issues connected with the code. 1.     They shall report and interpret the news with scrupulous honesty by striving to disclose all essential facts and by not suppressing relevant, available facts or by distorting by wrong or improper emphasis. 2.    They shall not place unnecessary emphasis on gender, race, sexual preference, religious belief, marital status or physical or mental disability. 3.    In all circumstances they shall respect all confidences received in the course of their calling. 4.    They shall not allow personal interests to influence them in the course of their professional duties. 5.    They shall not allow their professional duties to be influenced by any consideration, gift or advantage offered and, where appropriate, shall disclose any such offer. 6.    They shall not allow advertising or commercial considerations to influence them in their professional duties. 7.    They shall use fair and honest means to obtain news, films, tapes and documents. 8.    They shall identify themselves and their employers before obtaining any interview for publication or broadcast. 9.    They shall respect private grief and personal privacy and shall have the right to resist compulsion to intrude on them. 10.  They shall do their utmost to correct any published or broadcast information found to be harmfully inaccurate.

Appendix C

The current AJA Code of Ethics

Source: Alliance Online.(2006). (online)

Available: Source

Media Alliance Code of Ethics

Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism. Journalists describe society to itself. They convey information, ideas and opinions, a privileged role. They search, disclose, record, question, entertain, suggest and remember. They inform citizens and animate democracy. They give a practical form to freedom of expression. Many journalists work in private enterprise, but all have these public responsibilities. They scrutinise power, but also exercise it, and should be accountable. Accountability engenders trust. Without trust, journalists do not fulfil their public responsibilities. Alliance members engaged in journalism commit themselves to Honesty Fairness Independence Respect for the rights of others 1.  Report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts.  Do not suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis.  Do your utmost  to give a fair opportunity for reply. 2.  Do not place unnecessary emphasis on personal characteristics, including race, ethnicity, nationality, gender, age, sexual orientation, family relationships, religious belief, or physical or intellectual disability. 3.  Aim to attribute information to its source.  Where a source seeks anonymity, do not agree without first considering the source’s motives and any alternative attributable source.  Where confidences are accepted,  respect them in all circumstances. 4.  Do not allow personal interest, or any belief, commitment, payment, gift or benefit, to undermine your accuracy, fairness or independence. 5.  Disclose conflicts of interest that affect, or could be seen to affect, the accuracy, fairness or independence of your journalism.  Do not improperly use a journalistic position for personal gain.  6.  Do not allow advertising or other commercial considerations to undermine accuracy, fairness or independence. 7.  Do your utmost to ensure disclosure of any direct or indirect payment made for interviews, pictures, information or stories. 8.  Use fair, responsible and honest means to obtain material.  Identify yourself and your employer before obtaining any interview for publication or broadcast.  Never exploit a person’s vulnerability or ignorance of media practice. 9.  Present pictures and sound which are true and accurate.  Any manipulation likely to mislead should be disclosed. 10.  Do not plagiarise. 11.  Respect private grief and personal privacy.  Journalists have the right to resist compulsion to intrude. 12.  Do your utmost to achieve fair correction of errors. Guidance Clause Basic values often need interpretation and sometimes come into conflict. Ethical journalism requires conscientious decision-making in context. Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden. normal;">

If you feel an Alliance member is in breach of the code, you can lodge a complaint

Appendix D


Article 1: TOUR HIT FOR SIX

Source: Pierik, J. (2008). TOUR HIT FOR SIX.

Appendix E

Article 2: Indian cricket tour in doubt as a nation erupts in fury

Source: Brown, A. (2008).Indian cricket tour in doubt as a nation erupts in fury.