This presentation was the second section of assessment for 'Advanced Media Research, and it's success relied on the quality of the research conducted for the essay I had already completed.
My group decided to create and present a presentation based around a Guardian article commenting on the Sun's behaviour and conduct when one of its journalists was accused of impersonating a friend of a Grenfell tower fire survivor, to get past hospital staff, and to gain access to the survivor to interview him about his experiences.
With my question being whether I felt the press behaved in the public interest, I decided that the Guardian themselves, who published the article that we concentrated on, where behaving in the public interest because they alerted the public to the questionable actions of the Sun journalist and the fact that this behaviour had been reported to the Independent Press Standards Organisation for review.
The other side of the argument is-obviously-that the Sun did not behave in the public interest because they broke rules of confidentiality and privacy, along with just generally not being compassionate and sensitive to the feelings of the fragile survivor.
Using the research I'd already wrote an essay with, which achieved 64 out of 100, my group and I , each achieved 68 out of 100 for our collective effort in compiling our presentation.
I am proud of this mark, and I now have a deeper understanding L of what the boundaries of public interest in the press can be said to be.
YOU ARE READING
University of Portsmouth: First Year Diary
Non-FictionThe documentation of my journey through the first year of my English and Media Studies degree at Portsmouth University.
