Who will review the entries of the China Journalism Awards before they enter the final selection? How is it reviewed? What are the standards?
Don't worry, the answer is in this article.
The 33rd China Journalism Awards Review Committee is composed of 69 members. Among them, there are 22 representatives of **news** and local news**, 23 representatives of journalism teaching and research institutions, 1 representative of news management departments, and 1 representative of award organization units. A total of 1,254 works need to be reviewed. Among them, 7 are works written in Mongolian, Korean, Japanese, Russian, Spanish, Turkish and other ethnic minorities and foreign Chinese languages. During the review period, the review committee members are divided into 22 groups according to the five categories of text, radio, television, new ** and English works, with 3 to 4 people in each team, and review the corresponding works respectively. The procedure of the audit work is that the group reviews and puts forward opinions, and the plenary meeting discusses and forms preliminary opinions, and then according to the authorization of the plenary meeting, the director meeting composed of the director and deputy director of the audit committee reviews the preliminary opinions and forms the first draft of the audit opinions. During this period, the review committee also screened and selected the relevant comments from the public during the publicity period of the participating works. After 4 and a half days of group review and 1 day of plenary discussion, the review committee put forward a total of 2,189 preliminary review opinions on 768 works, and the works with review opinions accounted for 61 of the total number of declared works24%。The director's meeting reviewed the review opinions one by one, and retained 946 review opinions on 480 works, and the works with audit opinions accounted for 38 of the total number of declared works27%。The works that are "recommended not to be awarded" by the Review Committee shall be returned to the submitting unit by the Award Office of the China Journalists Association (hereinafter referred to as the "Award Office") for comments. If the submitting unit submits an application for reconsideration, the meeting of the director of the audit committee will discuss and decide on the trade-offs one by one, and on this basis, the final draft of the review opinion will be submitted to the selection committee. After reconsideration, 728 review opinions were finally determined for 380 works. Among them, there are 88 works that are "not recommended to win awards", 175 works that are "not recommended to win the first prize", and 117 works that are "not recommended to win the first and second prizes". In the audit, the basic principles of the audit committee to carry out their work are still the following: adhere to the standard and have a solid basis; Word by word, minute by second; Distinguish between right and wrong, regardless of good or bad; Speak freely and discuss fully. The focus of the audit is, firstly, to see whether there is a problem with the guidance, secondly, to see whether the professional is compliant, and thirdly, to see whether there are factual errors and language errors in the expression. On the basis of the previous work, the current audit committee has mainly made two improvements to the audit judgment:The first is to refine the categories of errors found in the audit. Last year, the award setting of the China Journalism Award underwent a major reform, breaking the form of works and communication media, connecting all kinds of awards, setting awards by genre and theme, and different works competing in the same project. To this end, the classification of errors has been adapted to the new situation. This year, the error categories have been further optimized, so that the audit committee members can classify the problems found according to the categories and clarify the audit opinions. The second is to refine the scale of evaluation criteria. The audit work emphasizes the unified evaluation standard, and a ruler measures to the end. In fact, the degree of leniency that each member of the auditor has is different. For example, the criterion of "punctuation marks that are inaccurate but do not affect the meaning of the text" are often judged differently by different people. This year, the use of this standard is regulated by the cases accumulated in previous audits. Grammatical errors caused by misuse of punctuation marks are counted as errors. If punctuation marks are obviously misused but do not cause grammatical errors, every 3 places will be counted as 1 error; The use of punctuation marks that are not standard but do not affect the meaning of the text, and the use of punctuation marks without punctuation marks are not counted as errors. Attached: List of members of the review committee of the 33rd China Journalism Awards