James Curran, in one of his works (can’t really remember which), enumerates a number of roles the media should play. The watchdog role tends to be the main attraction in journalism, but he adds that the media should represent the public/ citizens. However, I find the latter comes into conflict with the former, and this issue does touch on your brief analysis.

Curran generalizes quite a bit and by ‘public’, of course, I understand the majority of the public. So if that majority (in a democracy) votes the Bush Administration/ Howard Government into office, the media would simply have to nod to all policies introduced if we were to follow this ‘representation’ role. So where does that leave scrutiny which then leads to accountability? Where does that leave minority views? The media watchdog role is rendered void if this principle were to be followed.

With regards to this issue, I remember a TIME columnist saying that the US elections were all about the three Gs – Guns, Gays and God. So if the majority of the population believes that Bush tackles the three Gs better than Kerry, is there still a need to scrutinize Bush, at least in the context of these issues?

This whole comment seems to be a bit naïve and psycho, I know. But to what extent should majority views be taken into consideration by journalists? I just thought that if the media adheres to its watchdog role, it would certainly have to report in isolation of the public’s views (which is the case based on your analysis). For that reason it’s labeled the fourth estate.

I always thought it was for the government to represent the public, not the media.

Interesting that “the UK’s The Sun newspaper’s website - www.thesun.co.uk - looks like a soft-porn website”, Maggie. In that case, I’m not surprised that it’s the ‘biggest selling newspaper in the UK’!

I guess the SMH is trying to increase its readership, with the tried and tested method of sex in advertising & editorial - you have to admit, it does work, especially for selling papers to the biggest consumer markets - the younger generations…but does it work to uphold the dignified reputation of the Herald??

Thanks for drawing my attention to the article on girls & raunch culture Sancez…hypocritical to say the least!! Self aware…i’m not sure? I’m going to write my very next blog on that article, so consider that my reply to your comment.

I agree, I definitely think this reproduction of press releases reflects a lack of deep attention payed to gender issues, not only in news and the media, but also in social and political spheres. It’s slack not to do any additional research, especially for a local perspective, and it demonstrates that our society usually only seeks a superficial understanding of gender issues - despite the fact that they affect everybody’s daily lives.

And it’s true, discussions of gender divisions in the media tend to be oversimplified- it is impossible to offer a accurate “facts” about gender characterstics/relations, when there are so many other factors to take into account, eg. personalities, social class, occupation, career etc…

And I think reports that do try to simplify matters by presenting generalised facts only maintain and perpetuate any gender divisions & inequalities - as you said, to influence us to keep defining ourselves & others, according to what is normal behaviour for the category you’ve been allocated. It seems like such a modernist approach- to rely on scientific method and evidence for research and to present these facts without questioning them as if they are “truth”.

also when the whole michelle leslie thing was happening they had a link to a video of her in bodypaint modelling nude at the state theatre… nice!

relevant to the story? not really.. get lots of hits? naturally

It’s a very interesting point you’ve made considering proclamations of the SMH being a broadsheet especially when one expects a paper like the Daily Telegraph to be the ’sexiest of the lot’. Thankfully, the UK’s The Sun newspaper’s website - www.thesun.co.uk - looks like a soft-porn website instead of the ‘biggest selling newspaper in the UK’ as it proclaims.

Which brings me to my next point - its a classic case of ’sex sells’. It’s probably expected that The Sun is the UK’s biggest selling newspaper because of all the sex its advertising on its website - umm, ‘Page 3 of the year’? Am I at the wrong website? Maybe the SMH is trying to increase its readership in the face of the rapidly growing popularity of the Daily Telegraph? And to do this, they’re - as you stated - appealing to the younger generation i.e. senior high schoolers and uni students. Its also another thing to note that most schools and universities only offer subscriptions to broadsheets such as the SMH and the Australian.

Anyhoo - not sure if you’re checking your blog/email often (indeed you should! =P) but I sent you an email regarding our presentation.. oh perplexed!