Reith, P. (2012, May
15). Give Craig Thomson his 30 minutes of fame. ABC-The Drum. Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4010574.html
The Honourable Peter Reith, the author of this article,
lends much authority to this opinion piece, having been a former senior cabinet
minister in the Australian government. Reith immediately identifies himself as
a sceptic of Craig Thomson’s innocence, using the platform of the ABC’s online
forum The Drum to launch an attack on the Labor member. Using a series of rhetorical
questions, Reith systematically illuminates questionable and potentially
corrupt activities Thomson was involved with.
Reith outlines a enlightening version of the political events surrounding Thomson in the past three years, beginning with Labor’s and the independent MP’s defence of Thomson. He comments on the Oppositions stand against this and of the independents succumbing and conceding that Thomson should explain himself.
He discusses the stalling tactics of the Labor government, suggests Tim Windsor’s reaction to the whole debacle has been poor and quotes former democrat Andrew Murray to demonstrate how far politicians have fallen from their public’s trust. He concludes by saying the independents have to decide between “propping up a discredited government” championing “higher parliamentary standards.”
This piece is similar to the 2GB radio and DrumTV pieces. Reith is offering an informed opinion on the matter as a former government minister, but as he is heavily biased to one side of parliament, is opinions should not be taken as anything but that.
Reith outlines a enlightening version of the political events surrounding Thomson in the past three years, beginning with Labor’s and the independent MP’s defence of Thomson. He comments on the Oppositions stand against this and of the independents succumbing and conceding that Thomson should explain himself.
He discusses the stalling tactics of the Labor government, suggests Tim Windsor’s reaction to the whole debacle has been poor and quotes former democrat Andrew Murray to demonstrate how far politicians have fallen from their public’s trust. He concludes by saying the independents have to decide between “propping up a discredited government” championing “higher parliamentary standards.”
This piece is similar to the 2GB radio and DrumTV pieces. Reith is offering an informed opinion on the matter as a former government minister, but as he is heavily biased to one side of parliament, is opinions should not be taken as anything but that.
Smith, C. (2012, May
18). A legal perspective on the Thomson affair. 2GB. Retrieved from http://www.2gb.com/index2.php?option=com_newsmanager&task=view&id=12852
Chris Smith of 2GB radio interviews Dr Anne Twomey,
Professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Sydney about the legal
possibilities surrounding the HSU/Craig Thomson scandal, in light of his
upcoming speech to parliament.
The interview begins with Smith asking Anne if there is any precedent for the removal of a member of parliament without court process. Anne brings up the UK Profumo affair as an example, but states that Commonwealth law has been changed so that politicians cannot be expelled from office. Twomey goes on to say that despite being unable to be expelled, Thomson could still be suspended, fined $5000 or even imprisoned for up to six months in cells at parliament house, for contempt of parliament.
Chris then moves on, giving examples as to what the Opposition may do after Thomson delivers his speech. Twomey then discusses the options the Opposition has; they could call for a “prima facie case of privilege” to be decided on by the Speaker, or they could do nothing at all.
She then brings up the Independents, who would be the key to the vote for a Privileges Committee investigation, and concludes by saying the most likely outcome would be Thomson’s resignation.
This piece is masterfully done by Smith, and the high level of authority Twomey brings a degree of expertise not seen in the DrumTV report.
The interview begins with Smith asking Anne if there is any precedent for the removal of a member of parliament without court process. Anne brings up the UK Profumo affair as an example, but states that Commonwealth law has been changed so that politicians cannot be expelled from office. Twomey goes on to say that despite being unable to be expelled, Thomson could still be suspended, fined $5000 or even imprisoned for up to six months in cells at parliament house, for contempt of parliament.
Chris then moves on, giving examples as to what the Opposition may do after Thomson delivers his speech. Twomey then discusses the options the Opposition has; they could call for a “prima facie case of privilege” to be decided on by the Speaker, or they could do nothing at all.
She then brings up the Independents, who would be the key to the vote for a Privileges Committee investigation, and concludes by saying the most likely outcome would be Thomson’s resignation.
This piece is masterfully done by Smith, and the high level of authority Twomey brings a degree of expertise not seen in the DrumTV report.
Palmer, T. (2012, May
7). The Drum Monday 7 May. ABC-The Drum.
Retrieved from http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-05-07/the-drum-monday-7-may/3996468
Host of The DrumTV and long-time ABC journalist Tim Palmer,
tables the topic of the release of the damning Fair Work Australia report
regarding Craig Thomson with guests Kerry Chikarovski, former NSW Liberal
leader, Peter Lewis from Essential Media and Andrew Greene, an ABC Political
Reporter.
The show begins with a short prepared report laying out the key issues, quoting Bernadette O’Neill, General Manager of Fair Work Australia, and showing a press conference with Eric Abetz, a Liberal Senator.
Greene is the first to be addressed, describes some of the issues raised in and from the report.
Chikarovski’s opinion follows, discussing the justification of some comments made by Thomson. She also expresses horror at the poor handling of union members’ money.
Lewis, who works for several unions, then tells of the rigorous processes these unions use to utilise that money, and asks the question ‘what next?’ of the whole situation.
Palmer moves back to Greene to conclude the segment, who addresses the political implications for Thomson in regards the Federal Budgets announcement.
This piece is well constructed and, like the 2GB radio interview, is aired live with talent specifically tailored to the topic.
The show begins with a short prepared report laying out the key issues, quoting Bernadette O’Neill, General Manager of Fair Work Australia, and showing a press conference with Eric Abetz, a Liberal Senator.
Greene is the first to be addressed, describes some of the issues raised in and from the report.
Chikarovski’s opinion follows, discussing the justification of some comments made by Thomson. She also expresses horror at the poor handling of union members’ money.
Lewis, who works for several unions, then tells of the rigorous processes these unions use to utilise that money, and asks the question ‘what next?’ of the whole situation.
Palmer moves back to Greene to conclude the segment, who addresses the political implications for Thomson in regards the Federal Budgets announcement.
This piece is well constructed and, like the 2GB radio interview, is aired live with talent specifically tailored to the topic.
Esser, F, Strӧmbӓck, J, de Vreese, C.H. (2012). Reviewing key
concepts in research on political news journalism: Conceptualizations,
operationalizations, and propositions for future research. Journalism, 13, 139-143.
doi:10.1177/1464884911427795
Authors Esser, Strӧmbӓck and de Vreese, of separate universities in Switzerland, Sweden and the Netherlands begin this introductory article by broadly outlining political journalism research and identifying it as the intersection between political communication and journalism research. Discussing the increase in this research, the authors identify three key issues with the subject, namely conceptual clarity, comparability and cumulativity. Stating that these issues will greatly inhibit solid theories being made of the effects of political journalism, they then outline the purpose and scope for the special issue, offering logical and scientific reasons for the subject of each article.
Following a brief analysis of the varying degrees of political/public communication in news communication systems, the authors discuss the writers of the other articles in some depth, revealing their scholarly and geographical backgrounds and argue the advantages of their being from different language backgrounds in Europe. After outlining the form of the articles written, the authors conclude by emphasising their goal for the issue and welcoming debate and constructive criticism of the ideas put forward in the journal.
In comparison to the opinion piece by The Honourable Peter Reith, this article is highly credible and facts based, compared to Reith’s strong opinions and heavy bias and should be treated accordingly.
doi:10.1177/1464884911427795
Authors Esser, Strӧmbӓck and de Vreese, of separate universities in Switzerland, Sweden and the Netherlands begin this introductory article by broadly outlining political journalism research and identifying it as the intersection between political communication and journalism research. Discussing the increase in this research, the authors identify three key issues with the subject, namely conceptual clarity, comparability and cumulativity. Stating that these issues will greatly inhibit solid theories being made of the effects of political journalism, they then outline the purpose and scope for the special issue, offering logical and scientific reasons for the subject of each article.
Following a brief analysis of the varying degrees of political/public communication in news communication systems, the authors discuss the writers of the other articles in some depth, revealing their scholarly and geographical backgrounds and argue the advantages of their being from different language backgrounds in Europe. After outlining the form of the articles written, the authors conclude by emphasising their goal for the issue and welcoming debate and constructive criticism of the ideas put forward in the journal.
In comparison to the opinion piece by The Honourable Peter Reith, this article is highly credible and facts based, compared to Reith’s strong opinions and heavy bias and should be treated accordingly.
No comments:
Post a Comment