Brief #7: Exploiting A News Story

Being a media analyst, or should I say having a job in general, is an extreme conflict of ethics. On one hand, you want to set values and examples for those who look up to you. You use the media as an outlet to teach, voice your opinions, and create awareness for whatever topic you choose. But on the other hand, being woke doesn't always pay the bills. You may find yourself in a serious moral bind, but overall it is your decision to publicize whatever you say no matter who you work for.
School shootings are no laughing matter, and should be dealt with delicately and respectfully. The problem with 21st century media is that everything is or will be used as an analogy or message. The Florida school massacre left hearts broken and words unspoken across America, and not too long after we hear the usual speeches and condolences that are supposed to help everyone's grieving process move along a bit faster. During the dramatic live interview of a student who unfortunately had to witness the murder of her best friend, the audience cringed from the obvious despair she displayed from just the first question. 

The amount of exposure an event may get is debated regularly between news organizations. The touchy topics spring broadly across a variety of murders, terrorist activity, rape, war, etc. Believe it or not, a mangled body can be way too gruesome for the viewers even in this day and age. A common thought that everyone seems to come back to as we advance in technology and personal device usage came down to "should they air images of mass shooters going about their ghastly actions — a dilemma posed by the 1999 atrocity at Columbine High, where the gunmen were captured on security cameras, and raised again at Parkland, when cellphone videos emerged of children diving for cover amid the sound of gunshots?" 

Columbine Shooting

Florida School Massacre

According to The Washington Post, the comments went way left on social media as they bashed the NBC reporters for placing "a vulnerable teenager, perhaps still in shock, on national TV without apparently knowing the extent of her trauma." If fact The Washington Post raised a very vital question to today's society: "Where’s the line between informing the public and mining the horror for ratings and clicks?" Was there ever an extent, or are we constantly taking advantage of fragile conditions? In a separate theory, people could be overreacting. Although she is hurting, we will never know of how serious her mental stability was actually damaged. It could mean something extremely important today, but not nearly as much as tomorrow which could be why the hosts just dive in nose first.

Brief #6: Copyright and Fair Use

The National RifleAssociation, or NRA (@NRA), faces a charge of copyright infringement for using a GIF of Amy Poehler from the widely known television series Parks and Recreation. The GIF was used in a tweet as a hasty response to what Slate is calling a "heavy opposition" from CNN's town hall on the unfortunate events at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, FL. However, as nice as it was for the organization to pay respects to their representatives, Parks and Recreation creator, Michael Schur (@KenTremendous), felt otherwise…

A GIF is defined as a lossless format for image files that supports both static but mainly animated images. A lot of GIFs are small grabs of video that usually don't exceed 5 seconds. They are more commonly silent and can be captioned something other than the original context. A well known contributor to these files is a site called GIPHY that has billions of pre-formulated files for its users' pleasure. GIPHY has several partners in which they feature as an option to incorporate GIFs while texting or posting on social media. GIPHY also abides by the DMCA Copyright Policy; they provide a link to the policy's full text and states the procedures for reporting copyright infringement as well as a counter-notice. GIPHY is not the only legal GIF manufacturer, and it is safe to assume that others are employing some sort of copyright policy as well.

Tiffany Li, a student of Yale's Law School's Information Society Project that is studying intellectual property issues reviewed the circumstances of the case and concluded that “when I look at the use of this GIF, I think it’s pretty clear that there’s no copyright infringement. It’s fair use.” Generally, fair use refers to any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work in the opinion of Stanford University Libraries. It is not clear on the true source of the GIF that the NRA used, but it definitely was obtained through Twitter's "Add a GIF" option while creating the tweet. According to Slate, "It doesn’t appear that anyone has threatened the NRA with copyright infringement for using the GIF. But it’s worth asking the question: Could Schur and Poehler actually do anything to stop the NRA from using the GIF?"