Media Studies Teachers Online Resource Centre

An online collection of links, articles and websites relevant to the teaching of Media and Cinema Studies in the 21st Century. Designed with the needs of the contemporary student in mind, this blog is intended to be a resource for teachers and students of the media alike.

Thursday, 16 December 2010

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

By Glenn Greenwald via salon.com

The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention
Reuters/Jonathon Burch/AP/Salon

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture. Interviews with several people directly familiar with the conditions of Manning's detention, ultimately including a Quantico brig official (Lt. Brian Villiard) who confirmed much of what they conveyed, establishes that the accused leaker is subjected to detention conditions likely to create long-term psychological injuries.

Since his arrest in May, Manning has been a model detainee, without any episodes of violence or disciplinary problems. He nonetheless was declared from the start to be a "Maximum Custody Detainee," the highest and most repressive level of military detention, which then became the basis for the series of inhumane measures imposed on him.

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed (he is not and never has been on suicide watch). For the one hour per day when he is freed from this isolation, he is barred from accessing any news or current events programs. Lt. Villiard protested that the conditions are not "like jail movies where someone gets thrown into the hole," but confirmed that he is in solitary confinement, entirely alone in his cell except for the one hour per day he is taken out.

In sum, Manning has been subjected for many months without pause to inhumane, personality-erasing, soul-destroying, insanity-inducing conditions of isolation similar to those perfected at America's Supermax prison in Florence, Colorado: all without so much as having been convicted of anything. And as is true of many prisoners subjected to warped treatment of this sort, the brig's medical personnel now administer regular doses of anti-depressants to Manning to prevent his brain from snapping from the effects of this isolation.

Just by itself, the type of prolonged solitary confinement to which Manning has been subjected for many months is widely viewed around the world as highly injurious, inhumane, punitive, and arguably even a form of torture. In his widely praised March, 2009 New Yorker article -- entitled "Is Long-Term Solitary Confinement Torture?" -- the surgeon and journalist Atul Gawande assembled expert opinion and personal anecdotes to demonstrate that, as he put it, "all human beings experience isolation as torture." By itself, prolonged solitary confinement routinely destroys a person’s mind and drives them into insanity. A March, 2010 article in The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law explains that "solitary confinement is recognized as difficult to withstand; indeed, psychological stressors such as isolation can be as clinically distressing as physical torture."

For that reason, many Western nations -- and even some non-Western nations notorious for human rights abuses -- refuse to employ prolonged solitary confinement except in the most extreme cases of prisoner violence. "It’s an awful thing, solitary," John McCain wrote of his experience in isolated confinement in Vietnam. “It crushes your spirit." As Gawande documented: "A U.S. military study of almost a hundred and fifty naval aviators returned from imprisonment in Vietnam . . . reported that they found social isolation to be as torturous and agonizing as any physical abuse they suffered." Gawande explained that America’s application of this form of torture to its own citizens is what spawned the torture regime which President Obama vowed to end:

This past year, both the Republican and the Democratic Presidential candidates came out firmly for banning torture and closing the facility in Guantánamo Bay, where hundreds of prisoners have been held in years-long isolation. Neither Barack Obama nor John McCain, however, addressed the question of whether prolonged solitary confinement is torture. . . .

This is the dark side of American exceptionalism. . . . Our willingness to discard these standards for American prisoners made it easy to discard the Geneva Conventions prohibiting similar treatment of foreign prisoners of war, to the detriment of America’s moral stature in the world. In much the same way that a previous generation of Americans countenanced legalized segregation, ours has countenanced legalized torture. And there is no clearer manifestation of this than our routine use of solitary confinement . . . .

It's one thing to impose such punitive, barbaric measures on convicts who have proven to be violent when around other prisoners; at the Supermax in Florence, inmates convicted of the most heinous crimes and who pose a threat to prison order and the safety of others are subjected to worse treatment than what Manning experiences. But it's another thing entirely to impose such conditions on individuals, like Manning, who have been convicted of nothing and have never demonstrated an iota of physical threat or disorder.

In 2006, a bipartisan National Commission on America's Prisons was created and it called for the elimination of prolonged solitary confinement. Its Report documented that conditions whereby "prisoners end up locked in their cells 23 hours a day, every day. . . is so severe that people end up completely isolated, living in what can only be described as torturous conditions." The Report documented numerous psychiatric studies of individuals held in prolonged isolation which demonstrate "a constellation of symptoms that includes overwhelming anxiety, confusion and hallucination, and sudden violent and self-destructive outbursts." The above-referenced article from the Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law states: "Psychological effects can include anxiety, depression, anger, cognitive disturbances, perceptual distortions, obsessive thoughts, paranoia, and psychosis."

When one exacerbates the harms of prolonged isolation with the other deprivations to which Manning is being subjected, long-term psychiatric and even physical impairment is likely. Gawande documents that "EEG studies going back to the nineteen-sixties have shown diffuse slowing of brain waves in prisoners after a week or more of solitary confinement." Medical tests conducted in 1992 on Yugoslavian prisoners subjected to an average of six months of isolation -- roughly the amount to which Manning has now been subjected -- "revealed brain abnormalities months afterward; the most severe were found in prisoners who had endured either head trauma sufficient to render them unconscious or, yes, solitary confinement. Without sustained social interaction, the human brain may become as impaired as one that has incurred a traumatic injury." Gawande's article is filled with horrifying stories of individuals subjected to isolation similar to or even less enduring than Manning's who have succumbed to extreme long-term psychological breakdown.

Manning is barred from communicating with any reporters, even indirectly, so nothing he has said can be quoted here. But David House, a 23-year-old MIT researcher who befriended Manning after his detention (and then had his laptops, camera and cellphone seized by Homeland Security when entering the U.S.) is one of the few people to have visited Manning several times at Quantico. He describes palpable changes in Manning's physical appearance and behavior just over the course of the several months that he's been visiting him. Like most individuals held in severe isolation, Manning sleeps much of the day, is particularly frustrated by the petty, vindictive denial of a pillow or sheets, and suffers from less and less outdoor time as part of his one-hour daily removal from his cage.

This is why the conditions under which Manning is being detained were once recognized in the U.S. -- and are still recognized in many Western nations -- as not only cruel and inhumane, but torture. More than a century ago, U.S. courts understood that solitary confinement was a barbaric punishment that severely harmed the mental and physical health of those subjected to it. The Supreme Court's 1890 decision in In re Medley noted that as a result of solitary confinement as practiced in the early days of the United States, many "prisoners fell, after even a short confinement, into a semi-fatuous condition . . . and others became violently insane; others still, committed suicide; while those who stood the ordeal better . . . [often] did not recover sufficient mental activity to be of any subsequent service to the community." And in its 1940 decision in Chambers v. Florida, the Court characterized prolonged solitary confinement as "torture" and compared it to "[t]he rack, the thumbscrew, [and] the wheel."

The inhumane treatment of Manning may have international implications as well. There are multiple proceedings now pending in the European Union Human Rights Court, brought by "War on Terror" detainees contesting their extradition to the U.S. on the ground that the conditions under which they likely will be held -- particularly prolonged solitary confinement -- violate the European Convention on Human Rights, which (along with the Convention Against Torture) bars EU states from extraditing anyone to any nation where there is a real risk of inhumane and degrading treatment. The European Court of Human Rights has in the past found detention conditions violative of those rights (in Bulgaria) where "the [detainee] spent 23 hours a day alone in his cell; had limited interaction with other prisoners; and was only allowed two visits per month." From the Journal article referenced above:

International treaty bodies and human rights experts, including the Human Rights Committee, the Committee against Torture, and the U.N. Special Rapporteur on Torture, have concluded that solitary confinement may amount to cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment in violation of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhuman, and Degrading Treatment or Punishment. They have specifically criticized supermax confinement in the United States because of the mental suffering it inflicts.

Subjecting a detainee like Manning to this level of prolonged cruel and inhumane detention can thus jeopardize the ability of the U.S. to secure extradition for other prisoners, as these conditions are viewed in much of the civilized world as barbaric. Moreover, because Manning holds dual American and U.K. citizenship (his mother is British), it is possible for British agencies and human rights organizations to assert his consular rights against these oppressive conditions. At least some preliminary efforts are underway in Britain to explore that mechanism as a means of securing more humane treatment for Manning. Whatever else is true, all of this illustrates what a profound departure from international norms is the treatment to which the U.S. Government is subjecting him.

The plight of Manning has largely been overshadowed by the intense media fixation on WikiLeaks, so it's worth underscoring what it is that he's accused of doing and what he said in his own reputed words about these acts. If one believes the authenticity of the highly edited chat logs of Manning's online conversations with Adrian Lamo that have been released by Wired (that magazine inexcusably continues to conceal large portions of those logs), Manning clearly believed that he was a whistle-blower acting with the noblest of motives, and probably was exactly that. If, for instance, he really is the leaker of the Apache helicopter attack video -- a video which sparked very rare and much-needed realization about the visceral truth of what American wars actually entail -- as well as the war and diplomatic cables revealing substantial government deceit, brutality, illegality and corruption, then he's quite similar to Daniel Ellsberg. Indeed, Ellsberg himself said the very same thing about Manning in June on Democracy Now in explaining why he considers the Army Private to be a "hero":

The fact is that what Lamo reports Manning is saying has a very familiar and persuasive ring to me. He reports Manning as having said that what he had read and what he was passing on were horrible -- evidence of horrible machinations by the US backdoor dealings throughout the Middle East and, in many cases, as he put it, almost crimes. And let me guess that -- he’s not a lawyer, but I'll guess that what looked to him like crimes are crimes, that he was putting out. We know that he put out, or at least it's very plausible that he put out, the videos that he claimed to Lamo. And that's enough to go on to get them interested in pursuing both him and the other.

And so, what it comes down, to me, is -- and I say throwing caution to the winds here -- is that what I've heard so far of Assange and Manning -- and I haven't met either of them -- is that they are two new heroes of mine.

To see why that's so, just recall some of what Manning purportedly said about why he chose to leak, at least as reflected in the edited chat logs published by Wired:

Lamo: what's your endgame plan, then?. . .

Manning: well, it was forwarded to [WikiLeaks] - and god knows what happens now - hopefully worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms - if not, than [sic] we're doomed - as a species - i will officially give up on the society we have if nothing happens - the reaction to the video gave me immense hope; CNN's iReport was overwhelmed; Twitter exploded - people who saw, knew there was something wrong . . . Washington Post sat on the video… David Finkel acquired a copy while embedded out here. . . . - i want people to see the truth… regardless of who they are… because without information, you cannot make informed decisions as a public.

if i knew then, what i knew now - kind of thing, or maybe im just young, naive, and stupid . . . im hoping for the former - it cant be the latter - because if it is… were fucking screwed (as a society) - and i dont want to believe that we’re screwed.

Manning described the incident which first made him seriously question the U.S. Government: when he was instructed to work on the case of Iraqi "insurgents" who had been detained for distributing so-called "insurgent" literature which, when Manning had it translated, turned out to be nothing more than "a scholarly critique against PM Maliki":

i had an interpreter read it for me… and when i found out that it was a benign political critique titled "Where did the money go?" and following the corruption trail within the PM’s cabinet… i immediately took that information and *ran* to the officer to explain what was going on… he didn’t want to hear any of it… he told me to shut up and explain how we could assist the FPs in finding *MORE* detainees…

i had always questioned the things worked, and investigated to find the truth… but that was a point where i was a *part* of something… i was actively involved in something that i was completely against…

And Manning explained why he never considered the thought of selling this classified information to a foreign nation for substantial profit or even just secretly transmitting it to foreign powers, as he easily could have done:

Manning: i mean what if i were someone more malicious- i could've sold to russia or china, and made bank?

Lamo: why didn’t you?

Manning: because it's public data

Lamo: i mean, the cables

Manning: it belongs in the public domain -information should be free - it belongs in the public domain - because another state would just take advantage of the information… try and get some edge - if its out in the open… it should be a public good.

That's a whistleblower in the purest and most noble form: discovering government secrets of criminal and corrupt acts and then publicizing them to the world not for profit, not to give other nations an edge, but to trigger "worldwide discussion, debates, and reforms." Given how much Manning has been demonized -- at the same time that he's been rendered silent by the ban on his communication with any media -- it's worthwhile to keep all of that in mind.

But ultimately, what one thinks of Manning's alleged acts is irrelevant to the issue here. The U.S. ought at least to abide by minimal standards of humane treatment in how it detains him. That's true for every prisoner, at all times. But departures from such standards are particularly egregious where, as here, the detainee has merely been accused, but never convicted, of wrongdoing. These inhumane conditions make a mockery of Barack Obama's repeated pledge to end detainee abuse and torture, as prolonged isolation -- exacerbated by these other deprivations -- is at least as damaging, as violative of international legal standards, and almost as reviled around the world, as the waterboard, hypothermia and other Bush-era tactics that caused so much controversy.

What all of this achieves is clear. Having it known that the U.S. could and would disappear people at will to "black sites," assassinate them with unseen drones, imprison them for years without a shred of due process even while knowing they were innocent, torture them mercilessly, and in general acts as a lawless and rogue imperial power created a climate of severe intimidation and fear. Who would want to challenge the U.S. Government in any way -- even in legitimate ways -- knowing that it could and would engage in such lawless, violent conduct without any restraints or repercussions?

That is plainly what is going on here. Anyone remotely affiliated with WikiLeaks, including American citizens (and plenty of other government critics), has their property seized and communications stored at the border without so much as a warrant. Julian Assange -- despite never having been charged with, let alone convicted of, any crime -- has now spent more than a week in solitary confinement with severe restrictions under what his lawyer calls "Dickensian conditions." But Bradley Manning has suffered much worse, and not for a week, but for seven months, with no end in sight. If you became aware of secret information revealing serious wrongdoing, deceit and/or criminality on the part of the U.S. Government, would you -- knowing that you could and likely would be imprisoned under these kinds of repressive, torturous conditions for months on end without so much as a trial: just locked away by yourself 23 hours a day without recourse -- be willing to expose it? That's the climate of fear and intimidation which these inhumane detention conditions are intended to create.

Those wishing to contribute to Bradley Manning's defense fund can do so here. All of those means are reputable, but everyone should carefully read the various options presented in order to decide which one seems best.

UPDATE: I was contacted by Lt. Villiard, who claims there is one factual inaccuracy in what I wrote: specifically, he claims that Manning is not restricted from accessing news or current events during the proscribed time he is permitted to watch television. That is squarely inconsistent with reports from those with first-hand knowledge of Manning's detention, but it's a fairly minor dispute in the scheme of things.

at 12/16/2010 10:28:00 am No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: Censorship, Government, Wikileaks

Tom the Dancing Bug: Julian Assange Goes to Prison For Espionage, and Joins a Gang

click to enlarge

[via]
at 12/16/2010 10:13:00 am No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: Censorship, Government, Internet, Pictures, Wikileaks

Air Force Blocks Sites That Posted Secret Cables

by Eric Schmidt The New York Times

WASHINGTON — The Air Force is barring its personnel from using work computers to view the Websites of The New York Times and more than 25 other news organizations and blogs that have posted secret cables obtained by WikiLeaks, Air Force officials said Tuesday. When Air Force personnel on the service’s computer network try to view the Web sites of The Times, the British newspaper The Guardian, the German magazine Der Spiegel, the Spanish newspaper El País and the French newspaper Le Monde, as well as other sites that posted full confidential cables, the screen says “Access Denied: Internet usage is logged and monitored,” according to an Air Force official whose access was blocked and who shared the screen warning with The Times. Violators are warned that they face punishment if they try to view classified material from unauthorized Web sites.

Some Air Force officials acknowledged that the steps taken might be in vain since many military personnel could gain access to the documents from home computers, despite admonishments from superiors not to read the cables without proper clearances. Cyber network specialists within the Air Force Space Command last week followed longstanding procedures to keep classified information off unclassified computer systems. “News media Web sites will be blocked if they post classified documents from the WikiLeaks Web site,” said Lt. Col. Brenda Campbell, a spokeswoman for the Air Force Space Command, a unit of which oversees Air Force cyber systems. “This is similar to how we’d block any other Web site that posted classified information.”

Colonel Campbell said that only sites posting full classified documents, not just excerpts, would be blocked. “When classified documents appear on a Web site, a judgment will be made whether it will be blocked,” she said. “It’s an issue we’re working through right now.” Spokesmen for the Army, Navy and Marines said they were not blocking the Web sites of news organizations, largely because guidance has already been issued by the Obama administration and the Defense Department directing hundreds of thousands of federal employees and contractors not to read the secret cables and other classified documents published by WikiLeaks unless the workers have the required security clearance or authorization.

“Classified information, whether or not already posted on public websites or disclosed to the media, remains classified, and must be treated as such by federal employees and contractors, until it is declassified by an appropriate U.S. Government authority,” said a notice sent on Dec. 3 by the Office of Management and Budget, which is part of the White House, to agency and department heads. A Defense Department spokesman, Col. David Lapan, in an e-mail on Tuesday night sought to distance the department from the Air Force’s action to block access to the media Web sites: “This is not DoD-directed or DoD-wide.”

The Air Force’s action was first reported on The Wall Street Journal’s Web site late Tuesday and underscores the wide-ranging impact of the recent release of secret State Department documents by WikiLeaks, and five news organizations, including The Times. It also illustrates the contortions the military and other government agencies appear to be going through to limit the spread of classified information that has become widely available in the public domain. “It is unfortunate that the U.S. Air Force has chosen not to allow its personnel access to information that virtually everyone else in the world can access,” said a spokeswoman for The Times, Danielle Rhoades Ha. A senior administration official said Tuesday that the administration’s policy contained some leeway, for instance, to allow certain employees to download information in order for them to be able to verify that classified information was leaking into the public domain, and to assess damage to national security and potential danger to sources.

Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists, a secrecy specialist, said dozens of agencies, as well as branches of the military and government contractors, had issued their own policy instructions based on the Office of Management and Budget memo. “It’s a self-defeating policy that will leave government employees less informed than they ought to be,” Mr. Aftergood said.

William J. Broad contributed reporting from New York.

Related:

State’s Secrets

Articles in this series examine American diplomatic cables as a window on relations with the rest of the world in an age of war and terrorism.

  • Documents Documents: Selected Dispatches
  • Release on Bail of WikiLeaks Founder Is Delayed by Appeal (December 15, 2010)
  • FiveThirtyEight: Bayesianism and Julian Assange (December 15, 2010)
at 12/16/2010 08:18:00 am No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: Censorship, Government, Internet, Wikileaks

Saturday, 7 August 2010

German Schools to Teach Online Privacy

By Jessica Donath

Social networking sites such as Facebook play a large role in young people's lives - but not all children and teenagers know how to keep their data safe. Social networking sites such as Facebook play a large role in young people's lives, but not all children and teenagers know how to keep their data safe.

Internet companies such as Facebook and Google have come in for repeated criticism in Germany, where the government has concerns about what they do with users' data. Now one state, worried about the amount of information young people reveal online, plans to teach school pupils how to keep a low profile on the web. Many of Facebook's 2 million users in Germany are young people who might not give a second thought to posting pictures of themselves and their friends skinny-dipping or passed out at parties. Unfortunately, being casual with one's data also has its risks. After all, potential employers also know how to use social networking tools.

Now the government of the state of North Rhine-Westphalia, recognizing that young people are not always aware of the dangers of revealing personal information on the Internet, is planning to teach school students how to deal with the Internet and social networking sites such as Facebook and Twitter. "Our goal is to convey that the Internet doesn't only offer chances and opportunities, but also has risks that students should understand in order to exercise autonomy with regards to digital media," said North Rhine-Westphalia's media minister, Angelica Schwall-Düren, in an interview with the Thursday edition of the regional newspaper WAZ. "Many young people are unaware of how many details they reveal about themselves online," Schwall-Düren told the newspaper. Children need to know that future employers and friends can follow their digital footprint online, something that could negatively affect their professional and private lives, she explained. Social networking sites such as Facebook are controversial in Germany, where they have been criticized over data privacy concerns.

Schwall-Düren also stressed that young people need to learn how to be more critical when watching the news. "Many people just believe news on television or on the Internet without giving it a second thought," said the minister, who says she does not use Twitter or Facebook herself. To address the problem, the minister said the government wants to introduce a so-called "media literacy driver's license" in schools, whereby children would learn "how to deal with media responsibly."

'Cultural Differences'

The teacher's union GEW reacted to the new plans with a mixture of interest and caution. "How to conduct oneself in the virtual world and how to use new media are already topics in our schools on a daily basis," Michael Schulte, head of the local chapter of GEW, told SPIEGEL ONLINE. Schulte, however, said he had noticed "palpable cultural differences" between his generation and his students when it comes to new media. He fears that teachers "may not be equipped" with the necessary tools and resources for the new initiative. The state government still has to work out exactly how schools will help to make children fit for the digital age. Beate Hoffmann, a spokeswoman for the state's Media Ministry, told SPIEGEL ONLINE that an inter-agency study group will be established when politicians return from summer recess to decide on the scope, form and content of the new media literacy "driver's license." The government in North Rhine-Westphalia could turn to their colleagues in Bavaria for inspiration. A pilot project in which elementary school children are taught about different kinds of media with the aim of strengthening their independence started in 30 elementary schools there in the fall of 2009.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,710320,00.html
at 8/07/2010 09:15:00 am No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: Education, Facebook, Government, Internet, Privacy, Regulation, Safety, Social Media, Students

The Top 10 Movie Cliches

We've seen them so many times, we've forgotten that they're cliches.



at 8/07/2010 09:10:00 am No comments:
Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
Labels: Cinema, Media Production, Narrative, Video
Newer Posts Older Posts Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)

Search This Blog

Labels

ACTA (3) Activism (16) Advertising (21) Agency and Control (70) Australian Media Organisations (22) Auteur (7) Baudrillard (1) Bullying (4) Censorship (25) Cinema (32) Computers (30) Copyright (14) Downloads (12) Editing (7) Education (52) Facebook (14) Fair Use (19) Films Noir (1) Filtering (9) Gaming (15) Gender (17) Google (3) Government (50) Infographic (4) Inspiration (53) Internet (65) Journalism (34) Law (24) Leveson (1) Magazines (4) Media & Change (6) Media Literacy (74) Media Production (69) Media Trends (101) Media Use (70) Mobiles (5) Narrative (18) New Media (62) News (48) Noam Chomsky (1) NOTW (5) Photography (8) Photoshop (8) Pictures (27) Postmodernism (4) Print (23) Privacy (26) Race (3) Ratings (4) Regulation (33) Representation (28) Research (11) Resources (42) Safety (15) Script Writing (1) Social Media (27) Social Values (4) Stereotypes (16) Students (38) Superinjunctions (3) Surveillance (12) TED (1) Television (11) Tutorials (11) Twitter (4) Video (35) Wikileaks (5) YouTube (8)

Media & Teaching Resources

  • ABC EdPods
  • ABC Education Resources
  • ABC Gallipolli: The First Day
  • ABC Kids: RollerMache - Junior media resources and gallery
  • AccessNano - web-based teaching modules
  • ATOM - Australian Teachers of Media - Victoria
  • Australian Mediatheque
  • Australian National Schools Network
  • Behind The News - ABC Australia
  • Bordwell & Thompson: Film Art
  • Children's Media Consultant
  • Cinetext - Film & Philosophy
  • CITED - Centre for Implementing Technology in Education
  • Classroom 2.0
  • ClassTools - Free education games
  • Dannah Boyd's blog
  • DEECD, Victorian Government
  • edHelper - American junior school resources
  • Edublogger - using Web 2.0 for Teachers
  • edutopia - K-12 education resources
  • Factitious
  • Freddie Wong
  • Global Digital Citizen Foundation
  • Heywire - Onlise storytelling space
  • IB Film @British International School of Bratislava
  • IB Film Homepage
  • Institute of Play - Gaming Literacy
  • Internet Archive
  • Jump Cut - media in a social & political context
  • lessonbucket
  • Marshall Mcluhan Speaks
  • Media Channel - Media monitoring site
  • Media Education Foundation
  • Media Meltdown - Junior Media resources
  • Media Studies 2.0 Blog
  • Media Watch - ABC Australia
  • Media@ESF
  • MediaEdu - Media education resources
  • mediastudies.com - Internation Media Linkroll
  • mediastudy.com - Media Study Links
  • Metro - Australia's Film & Media Magazine
  • Multiple Intelligence Test
  • Myschoolblog - Online school organiser
  • National Organisation of Media Arts Database
  • Newsy - Multisource news analysis
  • Openbook - Facebook statuses open to all
  • PBS Teachers
  • Podcasting Underground - Tips & Help for Podcasting
  • Portable Film Festival - Online film festival
  • Quest to Learn - School of Gaming
  • Rate My Teacher
  • Reclaim Privacy - Facebook privacy scanner
  • Resources for Teaching Film
  • ruMAD - r u Making A Difference? -ducation, action, advocacy and events
  • SaveFace - Facebook privacy application
  • Society for Cinema & Media Studies
  • Sociological Images
  • Sound Librarian
  • Source Watch - Media monitoring website
  • Student Youth Network - Radio Station & Training, Australia
  • Teacher Tube
  • Teaching mise en scène
  • Teaching Television in a Digital World
  • TVTropes
  • Unteachables - UK TV show
  • VCAA - Media Studies Site
  • Wikipedia: Media Studies
  • Wikiversity

Blog Archive

  • ▼  2021 (1)
    • ▼  December (1)
      • Here's Why Movie Dialogue Has Gotten More Difficul...
  • ►  2019 (1)
    • ►  December (1)
  • ►  2018 (8)
    • ►  November (3)
    • ►  September (1)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  May (1)
  • ►  2017 (23)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (4)
    • ►  July (6)
    • ►  June (3)
    • ►  April (5)
    • ►  March (3)
  • ►  2016 (5)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  October (1)
    • ►  February (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2015 (3)
    • ►  November (3)
  • ►  2014 (15)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  February (13)
  • ►  2013 (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2012 (9)
    • ►  November (2)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (3)
    • ►  January (2)
  • ►  2011 (74)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  October (5)
    • ►  September (7)
    • ►  August (2)
    • ►  July (9)
    • ►  June (4)
    • ►  May (10)
    • ►  April (4)
    • ►  March (10)
    • ►  February (9)
    • ►  January (13)
  • ►  2010 (15)
    • ►  December (7)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  May (3)
    • ►  April (1)
    • ►  January (1)
  • ►  2009 (18)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  October (3)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (3)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  May (2)
    • ►  April (2)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (2)
  • ►  2008 (17)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)
    • ►  July (2)
    • ►  June (2)
    • ►  May (1)
    • ►  March (2)
    • ►  February (2)
    • ►  January (4)
  • ►  2007 (5)
    • ►  December (1)
    • ►  November (1)
    • ►  September (2)
    • ►  August (1)

Popular Posts

  • True Female Characters
    In this 7-minute video, The Escapist discusses female characters in video games and how game developers could incorporate women as complex...
  • Stuck In Motion
    From the blog Stuck In Customs by Trey Ratcliff Introduction This is an exciting new combination of hardware and technique that i...
  • Digital music, file sharing and the podcasting revolution
    The rise of digital music resulted from the convergence of different forms of technology. First, the development of MP3s which allows the a...
  • News Corp board shocked at evidence of payments to police, says former DPP
    By Owen Bowcott, legal affairs correspondent, via guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 19 July 2011 Lord Macdonald tells committee it took him '...
  • Media inquiry calls for single watchdog
    By Kylie Simmons Updated  March 02, 2012 21:11:20 VIDEO:  Australian Press Council chair Julian Disney discusses the media inquiry rec...
  • Top 10 internet filter lies
    by Eliza Cussen , 25 Mar 2010 - via The Punch Just in case readers believe what people tell them, here are some of the things that have b...
  • With censors swamped, Canberra signals it's time for self-regulation
    by Melissa Fyfe , The Age, April 3, 2011 Illustration: Matt Golding. ...
  • THE BALANCING ACT OF BEING FEMALE; OR, WHY WE HAVE SO MANY CLOTHES
    By Lisa Wade via Sociological Images @bfwriter tweeted us a link to a college design student’s photograph that has gone viral.  Rosea L...
  • Huge rise in intensely sexualised pictures of women... but not men
    By  DAILY MAIL REPORTER UPDATED:  08:42 GMT, 15 August 2011 The number of intensely sexualised images of women in the media  has soar...
  • The true nature of creativity: pilfering and recombining the work of your forebears (who, in turn, pilfered and recombined)
    Alex from Copy Me ( previously ) writes, "Copying is one of the most essential steps to creativit...

Translate

Facebook page

Facebook page
click picture to join

Follow on Twitter

Follow on Twitter
click image to follow

Total Pageviews

Featured post

Most students can’t tell the difference between sponsored content and real news

"I have... everyone has... they love it." Corey Delaney
Awesome Inc. theme. Powered by Blogger.