Improving news media oversight: Why Australia needs a cross-platform standards scheme

IF 0.9 Q3 COMMUNICATION
D. Wilding, S. Molitorisz
{"title":"Improving news media oversight: Why Australia needs a cross-platform standards scheme","authors":"D. Wilding, S. Molitorisz","doi":"10.1386/ajr_00086_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Australia currently has fourteen standards schemes that oversee journalists and news media, making for both duplication and inconsistency. The result is a torn and frayed patchwork leaving broadcasting heavily regulated but some areas of online content without any applicable standards\n or clear avenues for consumer complaint. In this article, we describe Australia’s confusion of news media standards schemes amid the global challenges to media oversight in a digital age, including from the algorithmically driven delivery of news via social media and other digital services.\n We argue that internationally the ongoing disruption of news media is being accompanied by a parallel disruption of news media standards schemes. This creates significant uncertainty, particularly since citizens and journalists have contrasting expectations about news media oversight. However,\n this uncertainty also presents an opportunity for reform. We then draw on international scholarship and regulatory developments to make four high-level arguments. First, Australia should implement a coherent cross-platform standards scheme to cover news content on TV, on radio, in print and\n online. Second, digital services and platforms ought to be brought under this scheme in their role as distributors and amplifiers of news, but not as ‘publishers’. Third, this scheme ought to have oversight of algorithms. And fourth, citizens ought to be afforded a greater role\n in the operation of this scheme, which has significant potential to serve the public interest by improving public discourse.","PeriodicalId":36614,"journal":{"name":"Australian Journalism Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Journalism Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00086_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"COMMUNICATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Australia currently has fourteen standards schemes that oversee journalists and news media, making for both duplication and inconsistency. The result is a torn and frayed patchwork leaving broadcasting heavily regulated but some areas of online content without any applicable standards or clear avenues for consumer complaint. In this article, we describe Australia’s confusion of news media standards schemes amid the global challenges to media oversight in a digital age, including from the algorithmically driven delivery of news via social media and other digital services. We argue that internationally the ongoing disruption of news media is being accompanied by a parallel disruption of news media standards schemes. This creates significant uncertainty, particularly since citizens and journalists have contrasting expectations about news media oversight. However, this uncertainty also presents an opportunity for reform. We then draw on international scholarship and regulatory developments to make four high-level arguments. First, Australia should implement a coherent cross-platform standards scheme to cover news content on TV, on radio, in print and online. Second, digital services and platforms ought to be brought under this scheme in their role as distributors and amplifiers of news, but not as ‘publishers’. Third, this scheme ought to have oversight of algorithms. And fourth, citizens ought to be afforded a greater role in the operation of this scheme, which has significant potential to serve the public interest by improving public discourse.
改进新闻媒体监督:为什么澳大利亚需要一个跨平台的标准计划
澳大利亚目前有14个监督记者和新闻媒体的标准方案,导致了重复和不一致。结果是一个支离破碎的拼凑,广播受到严格监管,但一些在线内容领域没有任何适用的标准,也没有明确的消费者投诉渠道。在本文中,我们描述了澳大利亚在数字时代对媒体监管的全球挑战中对新闻媒体标准计划的困惑,包括通过社交媒体和其他数字服务的算法驱动的新闻交付。我们认为,在国际上,新闻媒体的持续中断伴随着新闻媒体标准计划的平行中断。这造成了巨大的不确定性,特别是因为公民和记者对新闻媒体监督的期望截然不同。然而,这种不确定性也为改革提供了机会。然后,我们借鉴国际学术和监管发展,提出四个高层次的论点。首先,澳大利亚应该实施一个连贯的跨平台标准计划,覆盖电视、广播、印刷和在线的新闻内容。第二,数字服务和平台应该作为新闻的发布者和扩音器而不是“发布者”被纳入这一计划。第三,该方案应该对算法进行监督。第四,应该让公民在这一计划的运作中发挥更大的作用,通过改善公共话语,这一计划有很大的潜力为公众利益服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australian Journalism Review
Australian Journalism Review Social Sciences-Communication
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
17
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信