For the first part of our research, we individually completed the annotated bibliography exercise. This exercise was helpful but it opened up my eyes to how broad our topic is. While we decided to focus on Cinema, which i wholeheartedly agreed to, I was pulled in by other ideas through my research. I noticed once again that the political side of things intrigue me more than any other approach. For one of my annotations I read an article about a Norwegian news anchor who was criticised for openly displaying her cross necklace. This brought on much discussion about religion and politics. Many believed that a news anchor or anyone involved with the news institution should remain neutral or seem unbiased.

Here is my annotation of the article, with the article correctly referenced.

Lundby, K 2016, ‘Mediatization and secularization: transformations of public service institutions – the case of Norway’, University of Oslo, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 28-36.

The article sheds light to the issue surrounding news anchor Siv Kristin Saellmann, who was broadcasting while wearing a cross around her neck. The issue became national news when she received backlash for publicly displaying her beliefs, which brought on a new wave of backlash and criticism. The Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation (NRK) and the Church of Norway are the two main institutions involved in this case. Most argued that as an institution, the news anchor should be seen as a neutral figure with no bias when presenting news. Lundby points out that people of other faiths would be harmed with such thinking, especially in a country growing with immigration. With the growth of other institutions, religious institutions have lost and are still losing power. Historically, the Church had absolute power but with the growth of population, multiculturalism and secularism, that has changed drastically. The NRK and Church of Norway are criticised for their favouritism of each other. While the news anchor was criticised for her views, the NRK was more upset that majority knew her religious beliefs; the NKR had no problem with her religion. The NRK are known for hiring member of the Church, as they believed it was in the public interest but that is changing with the shift in society regarding secular beliefs and mediatisation of religion.

Religion as an institution is an interesting area to research, as the role of religion within a society has changed so drastically. Religion used to be one body and one institution with a lot of influence and power but nowadays, there are more institutions with equal if not more power. The article touches on the topic of bias, which is ironic considering that the NRK criticised her for publicly displaying her beliefs even though the NKR is known for hiring Christians. They would rather she conceal herself, to seem more reliable to a larger audience of Norwegian people, consisting of secularists and migrant Christians (who do not belong to the Church of Norway).

Our focus on cinema has not changed but this article intrigued me for many reasons, mainly the issue about neutrality. While freedom of expression is vital, this article also made me think about the voices present in mainstream media and how ‘neutral’ they are. An undeniable fact is that media is not ‘neutral’ or unbiased, this was proved when Waleed Aly received backlash for being nominated and then going on to win a Logie. Being unbiased is not possible, as humans we have morals and values that we stand by but the important thing is to draw a line between these two institutions. Media and news without diversity does not equate to being unbiased, it equates to segregation and anti-sentiment.