Suchergebnisse

AbstractAcross the world, public service media faces a legion of simultaneous threats—to its funding, its distribution, its value and its independence. These threats come at a time when the fundamental purpose of public service media—to provide high quality, verified, and impartial news and information—could not be more consequential. As our digital spaces become epistemological junkyards, cluttered with bot‐inflated, AI‐generated text and clickbait content, so the public need for stable, grounded and verified media intensifies. In such a chaotic information environment, one might have expected that the UK government would enhance its commitment to public service media. Instead, successive UK governments have undermined its sustainability, reputation and future.

AbstractThe Conservative party spent £1.2 million on Facebook during the UK 2015 general election campaign. This enabled the party to target specific voters in marginal constituencies with tailored messages. Their use of Facebook in 2015 shows how central digital media had become to their campaign communication. It also shows, however, that this communication may be compromising the principles of fair and open elections in the UK, for example by allowing parties to effectively bypass constituency spending limits and avoid transparency. Unless electoral legislation and regulation are changed to take account of developments in digital media they are liable to become increasingly anachronistic and ineffective.

The Conservative party spent £1.2 million on Facebook during the UK 2015 general election campaign. This enabled the party to target specific voters in marginal constituencies with tailored messages. Their use of Facebook in 2015 shows how central digital media had become to their campaign communication. It also shows, however, that this communication may be compromising the principles of fair and open elections in the UK, for example by allowing parties to effectively bypass constituency spending limits and avoid transparency. Unless electoral legislation and regulation are changed to take account of developments in digital media they are liable to become increasingly anachronistic and ineffective.

AbstractThis collection of pieces addresses questions raised by the Snowden revelations and their aftermath. All the authors were participants at a round‐table discussion at King's College London on Thursday 20 March 2014. The round table was chaired jointly by Sir Lawrence Freedman and Lord [Peter] Hennessy. Those participating were: Baroness [Onora] O'Neill, Lord [Ken] Macdonald, Nigel Inkster, Professor Thomas Rid (King's College), Ewen MacAskill (The Guardian), Gordon Corera (BBC), Jemima Stratford QC, Peter Horrocks (BBC), Charlie Edwards (RUSI), Professor Jean Seaton (Westminster University), Bill Peace (King's, ex‐SOCA), Air Vice‐Marshal Andrew Vallance (DA‐Notice), Carl Miller (DEMOS/King's), Lord (Alex) Carlile and Richard Sambrook (Cardiff University).The round table was organised by Martin Moore, director of the Media Standards Trust, and Benedict Wilson, lecturer in Defence Studies at King's and Research Associate at KPI. It was a joint Media Standards Trust–King's Policy Institute Event. For more information please contact martin.moore@mediastandardstrust.org or benedict.wilson@kcl.ac.uk.

In July 2011 following the revelations about phone hacking, all three political party leaders called for radical reform of the current system of press self‐regulation. Those within the press itself, including the Daily Mail, also conceded that serious changes were necessary. At the same time both politicians and press stressed the importance of protecting the freedom of the press and preventing undue government interference. Starting with both these pre‐requisites in mind—the creation of a new independent system and the protection of press freedom—this essay suggests four possible models of reform. For each model the essay sketches the basic parameters of reform and then suggests three problems associated with each. It argues against those who claim that anything more than small changes to the status quo would be too costly, would threaten press freedom, or would be technologically impractical.

Few would disagree that more transparency is generally a good thing for democracy. Indeed so few would disagree that an unthinking consensus has developed where transparency appears to have become the political tonic to cure all ills. Political unaccountability? Let's have more transparency. Economic inefficiency? More transparency. Too close a relationship between politicians and the press? We need more transparency. These six essays by Andrew Murray, John Lloyd, Helen Margetts, Sean Maguire, Aleks Krotosky and Kevin Marsh question the sometimes unthinking consensus about the benefits of transparency. They question it from a legal perspective, from a journalistic perspective, from a governance perspective, from a technological perspective, from practical perspective, and from a civic perspective.

Military fitness testing has historically assessed individual fitness components. Fitness assessments of this nature do not adequately monitor the physical requirements of military operations. The development of a more combat-specific fitness test would enhance accuracy in assessing the soldiers' readiness for the demands of war. This study aimed to assess the short-term reliability of the conceptualised 'Combat Readiness Assessment' (CRA) following a single familiarisation trial with 21 male phase-two British Army Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineer (REME) recruits (age (years) 19.7 ± 2.5) split into two groups (N = 11 and 10) to conform with recruit availability. The CRA was designed to be a multifaceted fitness assessment aimed at replicating the physical demands of a combat situation for military personnel. Methods: Three repeated assessments of the CRA were completed over a 10-day period (trial one as a familiarisation) to assess the short-term reliability of the CRA post familiarisation. The CRA was completed carrying a 4 kg rifle (SA80 A2) and involved a 400 m (M) run wearing an 11 kg backpack (removed after the 400 M) followed by weighted carries, sprints, casualty drags and agility tasks. Completion time (seconds) was recorded to assess performance. Intraclass correlations (ICCs) (2,1) with 95% confidence intervals (CI), the standard error of the measurement (SEM) and the coefficient of variation (CV) were calculated for completion time for trials 1-3 (T1-3) and 2-3 (T2-3) to assess reliability post-familiarisation. Mean Absolute Percentage Error (MAPE) was calculated for T1-2 and T2-3. Descriptive statistics were calculated for completion time for T1-3 and T2-3. Results: The reliability following a familiarisation trial from T1-3 (ICC: 0.75; SEM: 7.1 s; CV: 9.97%) to T2-3 (ICC: 0.88; SEM: 6.4 s; CV: 10.05%) increased. Mean trial time decreased post familiarisation from T1-3 (210.9 ± 21.03 s) to T2-3 (206.3 ± 20.73 s). Conclusions: These findings are inconclusive regarding the short-term ...