Journalism 120 - Marlee Schofield

The amount of information that is given in the photograph leads to many questions towards its credibility. The photograph shows the deformed flowers but, the information that accompanies the photograph is not enough to back up the photo. There could be speculation that the photograph was photoshopped. This could be a subject of fake news. There are no scientific facts that back up the photographs reasoning. There also are no other references/sources other than the photo itself. The evidence provided does not seem to be strong enough to be believable. Although the photo evidence is a strong point, there is just not enough extra information to back it up. Questions that immediately rise in my mind are, "are the grounds safe enough to walk on, only years after the nuclear disaster?". There is too many loose ends to immediately trust the article. To verify this claim, I would go into a deep research. I would find sources that are involved on sight and have a knowledge of the ma

Laws have been passed to protect journalists in their hunt to find out the truth. The dirty details can now be discovered without the constant worry of being personally attacked by the law. The journalists will now be protected from police surveillance and search warrants. The protection is under the "Journalistic Source Protection Act" (Bill S-231). This came into act because, Montreal police was spying on journalists who were releasing information that could be embarrassing to the person targeted. It is now almost impossible for security agencies to acquire warrants against journalists unless a judge becomes involved. Only superior court judges will be able to grant these warrants. Justices of the peace can no longer grant the warrants which is important because, many justices of peace work extremely close with the police force. The ability to grant a search warrant will now be a much longer process and have a more just reasoning in doing so. The bill also gives the journal