Legal and Ethical: The i

The i, similar to other newspaper, it's a direct source of news. The influence it has on the
audience is to directly inform but it can lead to negative effects.
If we look at the negative effects in terms of the hypodermic needle theory, it states that
the reader is passive and takes in information as it is given, meaning that the reader doesnt have
chance to form an opinion, rather just immediately believes it.
For example, when The i, reported on fracking, it pointed out all the negative parts, rather
than simply giving all possible points on the matter. By doing this it connotes negative views on
the government as well as the situation in general.
The i, is a liberal newspaper, meaning that the news may be presented as a more left
wing, rather than staying neutral on the news. This could insue that the reader gains more left
wing views as well.
A more positive effect the newspaper holds, is on the mood of either a passive or active
reader.
Newspapers often include a section of news which is offbeat to the general news of the
day. This section involves happier content, which in turn affects how the reader feels.
For example The i, recently included a section of news which looks at the UKs oldest cat,
Banjo, and his journey through life and how he recently got adopted after five years of
abandonment.
This type of news if taken in can lead to a happier outlook for the reader and can lead to
more positive day, or even a better view on how the reader perceives the world.
Leading on to issues of representation, The i, as said before, being a liberal newspaper
means that they like to stray away from using terms which may lead onto stereotypes.
An example of this is through how the newspaper reported the perpetrator of the Orlando
attacks. Rather than furthering the archtype that the muslim religion faces it avoided mentioning
his religion entirely, and didnt once call him a terrorist.
This example is a good representation of how the newspaper presents people in its
stories. Although this could have negative effects on how the public views the perpetrator.
By avoiding calling this man or any criminal a terrorist or murderer, it could lead the public
to view the perpetrator lightly, giving them sympathy on their situation, which in most cases is not
what they deserve.
As a newspaper The i, has to uphold the Editors Code, a set a rules put forward by the
IPSO. This means that they have to follow these rules, to avoid a fine and a loss of reputation,
which has fallen to many other newspapers.
Being a direct news source means that they have to firstly maintain stories that are in the
public's interest, hold privacy with those involved in the stories, not to obtain any information
through illegal means, to avoid offensive material or inappropriate images and furthermore to not
print anything that could result in contempt of court.
These rules are directly linked to the integrity of the newspaper, and fortunately The i,
despite their liberal views, has not had a run in with the ISPO, since its first publication.
Although this could be due to the fact that it is relatively new compared to newspapers
such as The Sun or The Telegraph.

Legal and Ethical: BBC Wildlife Magazine

 Unlike The i, Wildlife has no affiliation to daily news. But it doesnt mean it doesnt have
an impact on its audience.
A good effect that Wildlife has, is that it regularly shows influential people in the wildlife
world who has let their work proceed them. Meaning that by showing these people, the readers,
especially young ones, can easily pick up on new role models.
Also Wildlife puts out monthly news in about British Wildlife, which can include positive
articles about improvements in its society. This, like with the i, has a way of making the reader
happier, and therefore affecting their outlook.
A negative effect about this interest based magazine, is that if is readership has no other
interest or influences, when it reports on bad news it can completely engulf the reader into
thinking that it is the end of the world. For example a portion of the magazine is dedicated to
Wildlife enthusiasts giving there opinions on the news of the week, and they often have negative
connotations, due to the amount of news surrounding Global warming. This can make it hard for
people to see past the bad news, especially when they are reported on so vigorously.
Wildlife isnt like fashion or art, it affects the world that people live in, so when the
magazine reports on something bad happening, it inevitably is real. So this can cause a passive
reader to believe that it is the most important thing surrounding us, especially if the magazine
presents it as so.
This is a particularly a problem considering the magazine doesnt have to be neutral. If it's
about wildlife, it doesnt have to look on the opinions of the government or the fashion world, etc.
It only is concerned with itself.
This could also lead to prejudice views on anything harming the wildlife world, which is
just caused by the magazine being so biased.
Representation in this magazine is not a relevant issue as it doesnt concern views on
society or people, in general, it only concerns animals, insects, plants and any other factor that
affects the british environment.
Although it could be argued that it needs to have a fair representation of the things it is
presenting such as animals. For example it has been argued about how the media presents
sharks as dangerous and harmful, when in most senses it is unlikely that a shark will ever hurt
you.
As an wildlife magazine it is important that it remains factual.
Like every other UK publication Wildlife has to follow the rules set by the IPSO, called
The Editors Code. Although it doesnt seem that they would have a much of problem with such
things as contempt to court or protecting a person's privacy, there are many other relevant issues
that they have.
A good example of a relevant issue is the use of copyright. Wildlife, is a magazine
plentiful in its use of photography to capture an animal's essence. But it is important that they go
through the correct procedure to make sure that they are not copyrighted by something it has
printed. This includes either asking the photographers permission or paying the photographer for
the photo before they print it.
Another relevant issue is the issue of accuracy. As an interest magazine, yes the articles
written can biased towards the wildlife world, but that doesnt mean it doesnt have to maintain
accuracy. Meaning that everything written can be backed up by facts or established information
withholding its accuracy.
The magazine has never been written up by the IPSO, probably due to the fact that it has
to represent a part of the BBC, therefore it would be damning to their representation to be
followed up by IPSO.

 The regulatory body which is responsible for both products is an organisation

called IPSO. IPSO, stands for Independent Press Standards Organisation. I basic terms,
it means that it is responsible for all print media in the UK, and has a set of rules that
these magazines or newspapers has to maintain in order to be acceptable to them and
the public.
It was set up after the previous regulatory body called the PCC (Press complaints
commission), was criticized for its, or lack of,actions, during the phone hacking scandal
that took place in 2010.
IPSO has a set of rules, which I have previously mentioned called The Editors
Code of Practice, which include all of the standards that should be maintained by all print
media based products when releasing a story.
The Editors Code has 16 different clauses, all relating to such things as privacy,
accuracy, harassment, discrimination, the public's interest, etc.
If a certain product breaks one of these rules, a person can complain to the
organisation, IPSO steps in and gives its verdict on the situation at hand. This can either
lead to the complaint being dismissed or the brand responsible are given a warning,
being told to take down the article if possible (normally done on digital formats), given a
fine, being sued or in worse cases can even lead to the brand being taken down itself.
Meaning that it is vitally important that the rules set by the relevant regulatory
body are to be followed through and through if a brand wants to maintain reliability and
reputation.