Does anything like Media Watch exist elsewhere?

[weemadando]

Media Watch is an Australian program now in it's 20th year. It exists to report on bad journalism, conflicts of interest, "cash for comment", plagiarism, lies and all sorts of other misconduct in the media.

This is a weekly program that has a quite significant viewer base and it's not uncommon for them to end a story with: "and we've been notified by [insert name of parent company] that [insert name of journalist/editor/other] no longer works for them." It's also been responsible for bringing into the light (and leading to large legal cases) a lot of serious misconduct such as cash-for-comment and leaks. And thankfully, it's free to attack the hand that feeds it - indeed the most recent issue focused on some serious flaws with an award winning issue of the flagship current affairs program of the ABC.

So I was wondering - do any other countries have something as high profile as this? Or is it just small-scale/online stuff like Crooks and Liars?

[General Zod]

So I was wondering - do any other countries have something as high profile as this? Or is it just small-scale/online stuff like Crooks and Liars?

Short of telling an outright lie on something people actually care about and have enough pull to sue them for? The media sadly has pretty much free-reign with very few checks in the US. Otherwise Fox Noise and their ilk should have been put out of business years ago.

[Mr Bean]

The Daily Show and The Colbert report runs those kind of mash-ups from time to time but not on a dedicated situation Everything else is small scale like Crooks and Liars

[banquetbear]

...yep. Called Media Watch as well!

http://www.radionz.co.nz/national/programmes/mediawatch

[Kamakazie Sith]

There's an organization called "Copwatch" which does something pretty similiar. I think for the most part they do a lot of good, but they too have their black sheep. For example the website +copwatch.com is full of conspiracy theorists, racists, religious zealots, and anarchists.

[Edi]

We don't have a program like that, but stuff like that gets reported in regular news and there are safeguards and watchdog systems in place. Journalism in Finland is a serious business and lies and otehr such misconduct are a sure way to get an ignominious end to one's career. It's not like a journalist is hard to replace.

[Tiriol]

We don't have a program like that, but stuff like that gets reported in regular news and there are safeguards and watchdog systems in place. Journalism in Finland is a serious business and lies and otehr such misconduct are a sure way to get an ignominious end to one's career. It's not like a journalist is hard to replace.

The closest thing what we have is the Council of Public Word (julkisen sanan neuvosto), which monitors those newspapers, news broadcasts etc. which have signed the Council's treaty. The Council of Public Word also, at request, makes a statement concerning the morality and ethical conduct of a particular piece of news or a journalist(s)'s conduct (which the caveat that if the issue goes before a court of law before the Council issues a statement, they will take no stand on it). However, the Council cannot officially nor strictly speaking influence anyone who is not a signatory of the Council's treaty, which allows several magazines and tabloids to continue their less than honest conduct (I'm looking at you, 7 Päivää...).

[weemadando]

We don't have a program like that, but stuff like that gets reported in regular news and there are safeguards and watchdog systems in place. Journalism in Finland is a serious business and lies and otehr such misconduct are a sure way to get an ignominious end to one's career. It's not like a journalist is hard to replace.

The closest thing what we have is the Council of Public Word (julkisen sanan neuvosto), which monitors those newspapers, news broadcasts etc. which have signed the Council's treaty. The Council of Public Word also, at request, makes a statement concerning the morality and ethical conduct of a particular piece of news or a journalist(s)'s conduct (which the caveat that if the issue goes before a court of law before the Council issues a statement, they will take no stand on it). However, the Council cannot officially nor strictly speaking influence anyone who is not a signatory of the Council's treaty, which allows several magazines and tabloids to continue their less than honest conduct (I'm looking at you, 7 Päivää...).

Is that a formal gov't or industry body, or something independent and without any powers or authority?

[weemadando]

And they just ran a 1hr special "20th Anniversary" of Media Watch. It's kind of interesting to see everyone lining up for another round of sniping.

Watch the full episode online

[Tiriol]

We don't have a program like that, but stuff like that gets reported in regular news and there are safeguards and watchdog systems in place. Journalism in Finland is a serious business and lies and otehr such misconduct are a sure way to get an ignominious end to one's career. It's not like a journalist is hard to replace.

The closest thing what we have is the Council of Public Word (julkisen sanan neuvosto), which monitors those newspapers, news broadcasts etc. which have signed the Council's treaty. The Council of Public Word also, at request, makes a statement concerning the morality and ethical conduct of a particular piece of news or a journalist(s)'s conduct (which the caveat that if the issue goes before a court of law before the Council issues a statement, they will take no stand on it). However, the Council cannot officially nor strictly speaking influence anyone who is not a signatory of the Council's treaty, which allows several magazines and tabloids to continue their less than honest conduct (I'm looking at you, 7 Päivää...).

Is that a formal gov't or industry body, or something independent and without any powers or authority?

It isn't a formal governmental body. It was basically formed by several journalists and publications to make statements about the current level of journalism and to take stand on various issues brought before it. The Council does not take stand on those publications which are not signatories to it's contracts, although almost everyone has signed it (with few notable exceptions). And it has, of course, no authority as a court of law or anything like that. It's a self-regulatory body for journalists and newspapers, although its statements and stances are carefully watched and they often have great influence in media and even in government, from time to time.

Apparently, as of late, the Council has received considerably more requests for taking stands on various issues, which is a) good because more people are aware of the Council and its function and b) bad because it might also indicate that misconducts are becoming more widespread in journalism in general, although I'm not sure if there has been any formal study about it.

[Parallax]

And they just ran a 1hr special "20th Anniversary" of Media Watch. It's kind of interesting to see everyone lining up for another round of sniping.

Watch the full episode online

Media Watch is a fantastic show, entertaining and delivers valid criticism to bad journalism on a continuous basis.

The 20th anniversary show was brilliant, especially where Ray Martin went somewhat ballistic ... and at one point I thought John Laws was going to cry because he thought he was being picked on.

[weemadando]

And they just ran a 1hr special "20th Anniversary" of Media Watch. It's kind of interesting to see everyone lining up for another round of sniping.

Watch the full episode online

Media Watch is a fantastic show, entertaining and delivers valid criticism to bad journalism on a continuous basis.

The 20th anniversary show was brilliant, especially where Ray Martin went somewhat ballistic ... and at one point I thought John Laws was going to cry because he thought he was being picked on.

I loved how he just made himself look like such an amazing tosser by only agreeing to an unedited interview, wherein he just whined for 2-3 minutes about what big meanies Media Watch were for making him stop taking bribes.

Also wonderful was the whole "Shiers affair". I'd almost forgotten that dark chapter in Australian media history.