Hello there! Let's work together. With over eight years of experience in editorial and digital journalism, I bring a wealth of expertise in crafting engaging content that speaks directly to your audience. Whether you're looking for compelling articles, website copy, brand stories, or editorial features, I deliver writing that is clear, purposeful, and designed to inspire action. I’ve worked with a diverse range of clients and industries, including banks, tech firms, e-commerce platforms, beauty brands, and both print and digital publications. This breadth of experience allows me to adapt my tone, style, and approach to suit your unique brand voice and communication goals. Beyond writing, I’m also skilled in audio production and interviewing—ideal for projects that involve podcasts, recorded features, or multimedia storytelling.
My strengths lie in my creativity, strong communication skills, and ability to distill complex ideas into accessible content that resonates with readers. If you're seeking a versatile writer who offers value, originality, and reliability, let's work together to bring your ideas to life. I’m here to help you get to the heart of your message and connect meaningfully with your target audience. I look forward to working with you and bringing your ideas to life. Below is a sample portion of my writing: Impartiality is not a standard solely to the UK broadcast media; it is acknowledged as a professional standard in various journalism cultures worldwide (Ojala, 2021).
This essay will address impartiality in the UK broadcast media and why this strict rule of impartiality must persist in this era of online extremists, partisans, and violent views that cause dire issues. An example is the 2019 murder of local German politician Walter Lubcke whose support for Germany’s open border policy fuelled a dangerous narrative within right-wing online forums, which made him their victim (Delcker, 2020). Media regulation(s) in the United Kingdom In the UK, the print and broadcast media are regulated albeit differently. UK print media is self-regulated, and membership is not compulsory. Following the issues uncovered from the 2011 Leveson inquiry, the Independent Press Standard Organization (IPSO) was set up. “IPSO regulates newspapers and magazines in two main ways.
Firstly, it oversees the Editor’s Code of Practice, which is based on the Code of Ethics formerly used by the Press Complaints Commission and sets out ethical principles that journalists should work to both in the way we go about our work and what we publish. Secondly, it provides a means of redress for people who are affected by breaches of the code” (Quinn, 2018, p365). Impress is another approved regulatory body for the UK press; however, a vast majority of UK publishers are signed up to the IPSO scheme, with only a few print outlets joining Impress (ibid). All broadcast media in the UK are subject to Ofcom regulation. Broadcast stations do not have the option of joining or not as membership and adherence to Ofcom rules are compulsory. Complaints against broadcast stations from the public are directed to Ofcom, who then investigates these complaints. If the broadcaster is found in violation, Ofcom can impose a financial penalty or withdraw their broadcast licence. A key Ofcom rule for broadcasters is the rule of due impartiality contained in section 5. Ofcom states that impartiality means, “News in whatever form must be presented with due accuracy and due impartiality, due means adequate and appropriate to the programme and impartiality means not favouring one side over another… broadcasters should not give undue prominence to the views and opinions of particular persons or bodies on matters of political or industrial controversy and matters relating to current public policy in all the programmes included” (2021).
In addition, “Views and facts must not be misrepresented. Views must also be presented with due weight…programmes in the services must exclude all expressions of views and opinions of the person providing the service on matters of political and industrial controversy and matters relating to the current public policy [and] in dealing with matters of major political and industrial controversy and major matters relating to public policy an appropriately wide range of significant views must be included” (ibid). Journalistic impartiality Ojala (2021) explains that journalistic impartiality is linked to neutrality which is two-fold. “The first connotes the idea of non-interference, meaning that journalists should not in any way influence the events they report on. In this sense, neutrality can be understood as a detached observer position, where news journalism transmits only the facts and lets audiences make up their own mind.
The second from the context of politics and international relations prescribes an impartial position for journalists within political disputes… a type of journalism that avoids any particular social or institutional interests”( Ojala, 2021, p2043-2044). It is the principle and expectation of neutrality in reporting that differentiates the UK print media from the UK broadcast media. The Editor’s Code of Practice contains 16 clauses regarding print reporting however, the Code allows for a number of these clauses to be justifiably breached when done in the public interest (Quinn, 2018). Quinn also states “The public interest exception can cover both the way a journalist goes about researching a story and what they publish” (2018, p366). The Code also points out that there is a public interest in freedom of expression.
This provision of freedom of expression is the game changer and a major reason why opinion pieces are the norm in print journalism. Quinn explains the rational for the operational difference between the UK print media and broadcast media, “TV and radio have always been considered to carry risks that print media do not or at least to the same extent. The impact of moving pictures and sound and the fact that they can be broadcast immediately means their effect can be stronger and more direct than that of printed text and photos. So they are thought to have a greater potential to offend, persuade, and incite responses than print” (2018, p373). However, the ability of print media to persuade and incite responses is noted in research
