Since the downfall of the Press Council and its replacement with the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) in 1991, there has been an increasing tension between journalists and public figures over the disclosure of their private information. Public shaming in this form has become an emerging tradition in the media, as the definition of privacy has become an ever-shifting notion in our increasingly invasive popular media culture with the likes of reality TV shows and social media. With the introduction of the Human Rights Act (HRA) in 2000 as well, public figures are now able to go straight to court on privacy matters, which has ‘encouraged a new wave of challenges to the media on privacy issues in the UK courts’ (Tambini and Heyward 2002: 4).
Objectivity is an important aspect which needs to be considered in the practise of journalism. It is seen as a professional ideal which has become a troubling debate in modern journalism, leading to many questions. Does objectivity undermine the press as being the eyes and ears of the public? Or is it better serving the public to offer a variety of views? These questions only lead to a more complex one. Is objectivity even possible? The influence of objectivity needs to be explored closely to identify whether its effects on journalism are positive or negative and to conclude whether journalism can truly be objective.
A guest speaker visited University College Falmouth today to tell students about the ongoing process of the Press Complaints Commission.
Robert Pinker, an ex-Chairman of the PCC, talked to BA(Hons) Journalism students at UCF about the purpose of the PCC. This was essential for Journalism students to understand for their future careers.
The PPC was set up in 1991 as the regulatory body for news print. It deals with complaints from editorial content in newspapers and magazines to keep a high industry standard in the media.