Ключевые слова

Ombudsman, self-regulation, ethics, citizenship

Резюме

To transform an individual pain into a collective feeling of suffering is a capacity of all mass media. However, television has, in this point, a tremendous power. The capacity to join millions of TV viewers in front of itself is its most admirable merit, but it’s also its most dreadful danger. Principally when the point are the human rights, as the right of privacy or the right of not suffer in the public space, the demand of quality appears not only as an obligation of the Government but also as a duty of citizenship of all TV viewers. Although it is not properly a novelty in some European countries, the existence of a TV Ombudsman2 will be a reality in Portugal only this year. The Government has approved a legal diploma to create this figure, which will evaluate the programming and information of the public channel RTP. As the ombudsmen of press that we already know, the TV Ombudsman will be the person who receives the critics and observations of TV viewers, evaluates them and writes about them an impression to the administration of the channel. Being a self-regulatory proceeding, the TV Ombudsman is fundamentally a mechanism that implicates citizens. It is not only an entity of vigilance on ethics of Television. It is essentially a platform of dialogue between journalists, programmers and TV viewers. As in the press, the Ombudsman is a mediator. Although it is probably not an absolute guarantee of quality, TV Ombudsman is surely an argument of citizens against the bad things diffused by the box that we believe is the one by which the most important of our lives goes trough.

Ссылки

BAUDRILLARD, J. (2003): La transparência del mal: ensayo sobre los fenómenos extremos. Barcelona, Editorial Anagrama.

Link Google Scholar

BOURDIEU, P. (2001): Sobre a Televisão. Oeiras, Celta Editores.

Link Google Scholar

CÉBRIAN, J.L. (2004): «Terrorismo en el Pozo», en El Pais, 12 de Março.

Link Google Scholar

DEBORD, G. (1992): La société du spectacle. Paris, Éditions Galimmard.

Link Google Scholar

FIDALGO, J. (2001): «Entre a Televisão e o Jornal», en Público, 16 de Setembro.

Link Google Scholar

GILLMOR, D. (2005): «The end of objectivity», en

Link Google Scholar

https://dangillmor.typepad.com/dan_gillmor_on_grassroots/2005/01/the_end_of_obje.html

Link Google Scholar

MALHEIROS, J.V. (2001): «O que é que sentiu?», en Público, 13 de Março.

Link Google Scholar

MAÑERO, C. (1997): «Cuando el dolor es noticia», en ISTMO, 231, Julho/Agosto.

Link Google Scholar

MIRANDA, J.B. (1999): «Fim da Mediação? De uma agitação na metafísica contemporânea», en Comunicação e Linguagens, 25/26, Março.

Link Google Scholar

PERNIOLA, M. (1993): Do sentir. Lisboa, Editorial Presença.

Link Google Scholar

POPPER, K. (1999): Televisão: um perigo para a democracia. Lisboa, Gradiva.

Link Google Scholar

SONTAG, S. (2003): Olhando o sofrimento dos outros. Lisboa, Gótica.

Link Google Scholar

Fundref

Эта работа не имеет финансовой поддержки

Crossmark

Техническая спецификация

метрика

Метрики этой статьи

Просмотров: 0

Ознакомление с аннотациями:

загрузки PDF-файлов:

Полные метрики 25

Просмотров: 0

Ознакомление с аннотациями:

загрузки PDF-файлов:

Цитируется

Цитаты в Web of Science

В настоящее время нет ссылок на этот документ

Цитаты в Scopus

В настоящее время нет ссылок на этот документ

Цитаты в Google Scholar

В настоящее время нет ссылок на этот документ

Скачать

Альтернативные метрики

Как процитировать

da-Costa-Oliveira, M. (2005). TV Ombudsman: an argument against Pandora’s Box. [Provedor do telespectador: um argumento contra a caixa de Pandora]. Comunicar, 25. https://doi.org/10.3916/C25-2005-130

Доля

           

Почтовый ящик 527

21080 Уэльва (Испания)

Администрация

Редакция

Creative Commons

Данный сайт использует куки-файлы для получения статистических данных о навигации своих пользователей. Если вы продолжите просмотр, мы считаем, что вы принимаете его использование. +info X