News media in The Netherlands show great variety in the extent and ways, in which they realize media accountability online in terms of actor transparency, product transparency and feedback opportunities online. It is suggested that even those news rooms that seem to adhere to transparency and public accountability still need to explore the functionality and application of media accountability instruments (MAI). Both in terms of potentials and pitfalls, news rooms need to consider about what they want to be transparent and in what ways. To the extent that online innovations are visible, traditional news media seem to experiment, as is the case with newsroom blogs or the project of hyper local journalism Dichtbij.nl, part of the Telegraaf Company. Various news media have on-going projects on audience participation, online applications and distribution models. However, since many projects merely aim at finding new applications, processes, platforms and business models, it remains to be seen assess whether projects are indeed reasonably innovative and feasible at the same time. The development of an online and therefore immediate, archived, personalized and interactive context, offers practical and ethical challenges to Dutch journalism. These challenges bring shifts in its role and responsibility to society. It means that changes occur in what journalists are accountable for, as well as ways in how they are accountable. The Dutch media landscape lodges various professional accountability instruments like the press council and both profession-wide and news media specific codes of ethics, but some of these instruments receive only moderate support. Proactive openness is more an exception than the rule and may well be a distinctive indicator for quality journalism. Although news media often acknowledge the importance of media accountability offline and online, they often lack the resources or courage to use them or have different priorities. This ambiguous position may indicate that in relation to media accountability online, Dutch news media are between hope and fear: that it will either improve their relationship with the public and fuel professional quality, or ask too much of resources with too little benefit.
Game development businesses often choose Lua for separating scripted game logic from reusable engine code. Lua can easily be embedded, has simple interfaces, and offers a powerful and extensible scripting language. Using Lua, developers can create prototypes and scripts at early development stages. However, when larger quantities of engine code and script are available, developers encounter maintainability and quality problems. First, the available automated solutions for interoperability do not take domain-specific optimizations into account. Maintaining a coupling by hand between the Lua interpreter and the engine code, usually in C++, is labour intensive and error-prone. Second, assessing the quality of Lua scripts is hard due to a lack of tools that support static analysis. Lua scripts for dynamic analysis only report warnings and errors at run-time and are limited to code coverage. A common solution to the first problem is developing an Interface Definition Language (IDL) from which ”glue code”, interoperability code between interfaces, is generated automatically. We address quality problems by proposing a method to complement techniques for Lua analysis. We introduce Lua AiR (Lua Analysis in Rascal), a framework for static analysis of Lua script in its embedded context, using IDL models and Rascal.
