How Journalism has changed from the 20th to the 21st century Research Paper

How Journalism has changed from the 20th to the 21st century - Research Paper Example Fast forward to the 21st century and news reporting has taken a completely new direction as more individuals are becoming aware of the world`s situation with all these events occurring such as catastrophes and political dynamics. It is very evident with more and younger people getting involved in the journalism and mass communication industry. The 24-hour news cycle was introduced to keep people informed of events at all times. Nowadays, there are stations such as CNN (Henderson 259), which solely report any occurrences that might happen. It is good since people are well informed on everything as it happens. However, some reporters share their information without having any facts to backup their claims. This 24-hour news cycle has given rise to institutions such as blogs (Macnamara 249) that deal solely on gossip and slander. They do not care if the readers or viewers believe them or not, their sole priority is making money, and they do not care if the stories they air or publish are damaging to some people. Recently reporters have taken as interest in speculating rather than reporting facts. It is because people want news that will interest them and not sitting on the couch and enduring two to three hours or boring and poorly produced news bulletins. That is why gossip sites and blogs such as TMZ are among the most beloved by the world over because they report both serious events as well as the amusing occurrences. They also encourage anyone with anything to share, can post their stories or videos on their website. This mode of reporting has its advantages and disadvantages. One advantage is that people can share their stories with everyone in the world while the downside is that there is no privacy in their reporting and the stories are poorly done since it takes time to verify if the stories told are merely fabrications, speculations or hard, irrefutable facts. Nowadays people are more informed than they were back in the 20th

Law Case Analysis Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2250 words

Law Case Analysis - Essay Example The House of Commons can implement the judgement at its level. Considering the case of Spiliada Maritime V. Cansulex, the house of commons did not fully give a satisfaction to the defendant thus the defendant went ahead and made an appeal given by Lord Goff where He made a ruling that, there was enough natural form including applicable law relating to the matter, availability of witnesses, presence of the residence of the two parties and that the plaintiff had a possibility of obtaining foreign jurisdiction. Thus, there was making of a judgement by the Supreme Court. In this case, there is a judgement considering that there is no other jurisdiction that suits the requirements of the parties. The procedure the court follows includes; granting the basic principle when there is enough satisfaction by the court that there is another forum that can settle the dispute forum of the parties thus applying more suitably to the satisfaction of the parties. The court then determines the legal bu rden of proof which shows enough evidence. The Supreme Court then determines who lies with the burden depending on the existence of a natural or a forum which is appropriate. After this, the court finds the factors that show there is the existence of another forum which entails the presence of enough witnesses as well as the law that will be under administration in settling the dispute. At this moment, the court will get to a conclusion as to whether another forum is available. If there is another forum, the court then grants a stay considering the circumstances surrounding the dispute as seen in the ruling of Lord Goff1. Factors that the court takes into consideration and illustrative cases In relation to the forum non conveniens, its appropriateness is brought to question and also the applicability of the principle of forum non conveniens. This relates to cost, the outcome as well as the delays in the implementation of the principle. The principle finds its application in internat ional law especially in the private section. Its long process of implementation makes the principle to be in use in the domestic system, which involves cases where the judicial structure does not have a structure that has unification and where the judicial system is federal. The uncertainty of the outcome is due to the expansions in the level of jurisdiction in the legislation where plaintiffs can file a suit at their residential places. According to the code of civil procedure, there should be the filling of suits in the residential place of the defendant rather than that of the plaintiff. There are many details in this system due to the fact that the defendant will not accept the filling of the suit to take place at the residence of the plaintiff; this is because it may be taken as a weapon of harassment forcing the defendant to go to the residence of the plaintiff which may be far. Further, many past judgements have taken effect thus the court may have a challenge in deciding whi ch is the best channel to solve the dispute amicably thus leading to delays. There are enormous costs from the implementation of this principle where, the defendant and the plaintiff may face off due to the fact that they have the right for the cases to be heard at the place due to the cost as well as moving there witnesses to the residence