Author:
Music Inside Buzz info posting
[Edit]
|
Date Posted: 12:38:57 02/19/05 Sat
" Feds Warned About Fake News Videos "
" Seeking Ethical Standards "
This may be U.S. news but someday will apply to
the Philippines. Take note, Backroom and Boy Abunda!
------------------------------>
" Seeking Ethical Standards "
Posted: Dec. 10, 2004
Journalism Ethics
In recent years, the public's opinion of the news media has become increasingly negative due in part to high-profile instances of individuals breaking the largely unwritten code of journalism ethics.
In the wake of The New York Times' 2003 journalism scandal involving Jayson Blair, many news organizations reexamined and tightened their internal ethics policies in an effort to avoid a similar scandal. To rebuild the damaged trust, news organizations are becoming more transparent with the public about their internal professional standards and ethics.
It is difficult to codify exactly what is right from wrong since real life situations present many gray areas, yet there are general principles that American journalists recognize as proper professional standards for conduct.
The common denominators include the obligation to be accurate and fair, to inform the public fully of legitimate concerns, to be honest in dealing with sources and subjects, to create authentic work and to uphold journalistic independence and avoid even the appearance of a conflict of interest, Bob Steele, director of the Ethics Program at the Poynter Institute, told the Online NewsHour.
The Call for Standards in Journalism
Although it may seem that the media's credibility is declining, journalists are dramatically more professional and ethical than their predecessors from the 19th and early 20th centuries.
In the 19th century, news organizations acted largely as party organs and, consequently, were heavily biased toward a particular politician or party, said Mark Feldstein, associate professor at the School of Media and Public Affairs at George Washington University. In fact, reporters of that era routinely accepted bribes and many were on the payrolls of government officials.
Professional journalism developed in the late 1800s and early 1900s as many fields, including medicine, teaching and the law, moved to adopt professional standards during the country's Progressive Era.
Professionalism in the news industry represented a backlash to the "yellow journalism" -- sensationalist and factually questionable stories -- that dominated newspapers of the 19th century, Steele said.
Additionally, news organizations -- wanting to expand their audience and their bottom lines -- began to discard partisan reporting that appealed to small "niche" groups in favor of objective and independent reporting that could attract a wider readership, Christopher Hanson, assistant journalism professor at the University of Maryland, told the Online NewsHour.
By the 1920s, the new media of movies and radio challenged the newspaper business, prompting the industry to stress its growing professionalism.
In 1922, the American Society of Newspaper Editors introduced the first ethical guidelines, called the "Canons of Journalism." The Canons focused on Responsibility; Freedom of Speech; Independence; Sincerity; Truthfulness and Accuracy; Impartiality; Fair Play and Decency.
The guidelines underscore that because journalists are protected under the First Amendment, they have a responsibility and public obligation to maintain professional integrity and to respect the code of ethics.
Most broadcast and print news organizations have adapted their internal policies from various journalism associations, including ASNE, the Associated Press Managing Editors, the Society of Professional Journalists and the Radio-Television News Directors Association. These professional organizations have created voluntary ethical standards as a basis for news organizations and individual journalists to tailor for their own needs.
A Foundation for Ethics
The Society of Professional Journalists developed one of the more comprehensive ethical codes.
The SPJ code says journalists should "Seek Truth and Report It," and addresses plagiarism, vetting sources, presenting full and fair information, avoiding stereotypes and reporting subjectively.
Second, the code says "ethical journalists treat sources, subjects and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect." This section, entitled "Minimize Harm," encourages journalists to be sensitive in covering tragedies and to recognize that "gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort."
The third section, under the heading "Act Independently," addresses the sticky issue of conflict of interests, which could include political activities, family ties and financial holdings.
"Journalists should remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility," the SPJ said. For instance, many newspapers, such as the San Francisco Chronicle, explicitly forbid newsroom staffers from participating in political demonstrations or from making political donations. This guideline can also be applied to being offered gifts, favors, free travel and other special treatment.
SPJ's final section, "Be Accountable," stipulates that journalists "are accountable to their readers, listeners, viewers and each other." This article encourages a dialogue between news organizations and their audience to ensure that journalists are fulfilling their obligation to inform the public and for journalists to "expose unethical practices of journalists and the news media."
Unique Codes for Individual News Organizations
Throughout the years, organizations have tailored the SPJ guidelines to address particular newsroom situations.
At Reuters, for instance, reporters must notify an editor when writing about a company in which they own stock. They cannot trade in that security for a month after their assignment to prevent even the appearance that they gained inside knowledge about the company, according to Businessjournalism.org.
Steele said the intersection of journalism and business values represented a growing challenge to ethical standards, but some organizations have maintained meaningful firewalls between the corporate units and the news division.
Because many newspapers and broadcasts are owned by publicly traded corporations, news organizations, including Gannett Co. Inc. and Knight Ridder, strictly prohibit staffers from sharing inside information or from trading company stock until such information becomes available to the public. Gannett's ethics code lists the possible consequences, including job termination and being turned over to the federal authorities, for violating this rule.
News organizations covering the federal government often create more stringent guidelines regarding ethical challenges unique to reporting in Washington, D.C.
In its Standards and Ethics Statement, The Washington Post acknowledges that its unique power as "the dominant morning newspaper in the capital of the free world carries with it special responsibilities."
The guideline devotes substantial attention to the "Conflict of Interest" issue, underscoring that staffers must avoid any political involvement that could even appear to discredit the Post's journalistic standards.
Furthermore, the Post warned that the political activities or employment of staffers' relatives could at least appear to "compromise our integrity." For this reason, "the business or professional ties of family members must be disclosed to department heads," according to its 1999 guideline as posted on ASNE's Web site.
Another difficult issue major news organizations must tackle is the use of anonymous sources.
Many national news broadcasts, such as PBS' NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and newspapers have entirely ruled out the use of anonymous sources for various reasons, such as the questionable credibility and unknown motivations of unnamed sources. But several major newspapers, including the Post and The New York Times, will permit unidentified sourcing in certain circumstances.
Following the New York Times' 2003 plagiarism scandal, the Post in February 2004 issued new guidelines regarding the use of confidential sources, as well as other stylistic changes. The updated policy requires that "at least one editor know the identity of every anonymous source quoted in the newspaper."
The revision aims to ensure that anonymous sourcing would be used judiciously. "We must be certain in our own minds that the benefit to readers is worth the cost in credibility," the new guideline states.
In a Feb. 17 staff memo, Post executive editor Leonard Downie Jr. and then-managing editor Steve Coll urged all employees to learn the new rules: "Please read them carefully, refer to them when necessary, remember and respect them. They are important."
Later that month, The New York Times also introduced rules designed to significantly limit the paper's use of unidentified sources in its articles. The Times' revision sought to improve reader trust and clarify how the paper justified citing anonymous sources.
The revision came several months before the Times published a critical self-review of its prewar reporting found to depend too heavily on unreliable anonymous Iraqi sources.
But, several media experts, including Hanson and Feldstein, expressed skepticism about these recent efforts to better regulate anonymous sourcing.
The Washington press corps will cite "unnamed officials" more often than anywhere else as though it was "part of the territory of covering the federal government," Hanson said. Hanson underscored that the journalists who do not provide sources confidentiality will find themselves at a competitive disadvantage -- and will miss out on stories -- against other news organizations that do.
There have been "periodic spasms against using anonymous sources, but nobody really wants to get rid" of the practice, Feldstein said. On the other hand, he noted that the Post's legendary Watergate reporting removed some of the stigma around the "unnamed source," saying the practice can be crucial in revealing important government secrets or breaking other significant news.
A Simple Code?
The basic ethical principles appear straightforward, but there are numerous instances in which the best course of action was not so clear.
"The trouble (with ethics codes) is most real life situations fall in gray areas that are difficult to spell out in an actual code," Feldstein noted.
Sometimes one principle -- such as to report with decency -- will conflict with another -- to report accurately and fully. For instance, a reporter trying to cover the alleged rape of a teenage girl by five football players may wonder how much information to reveal, such as the victim's name or information on the suspected perpetrators.
The directives against plagiarizing or fabricating seem obvious as well, yet journalists may feel they can "borrow" a quote or embellish for narrative detail.
Kelly McBride, an ethics faculty member at the Poynter Institute, wrote in May 2003 that taking quotes or details from other publications is sometimes unintended.
"The Internet and newspaper databases allow a reporter to download the work of others into word-processing files that can be mistaken for genuine notes or intentionally cribbed," McBride wrote.
Along those lines, the technique of embellishing, or reconstructing, scenes "is becoming more widespread since narrative writing has become a common tool of the newspaper." Even so, McBride wrote, "the reader should be told, and so should the editor. Disclosure can easily be made with a sentence in a story or an editor's note."
"Not everyone understands what plagiarism means these days," Steele told the Online NewsHour. Journalists know it is inappropriate to claim others' work as their own without giving appropriate credit, but, according to Steele, how much of another's work can be used without accreditation and what about information in the public domain, such as historical information, remains unclear.
Another conundrum journalists routinely encounter is the effort to report fairly and without bias.
Steele rejected applying the term "objectivity" to journalism -- saying no human being could be a "blank slate" without opinion or feeling -- but stressed that it was possible to keep biases out of reporting to protect the independence of journalism.
"There are mechanisms to be objective -- by using multiple sources, opposing sources and multiple checks and balances. Those techniques help create objective reports," Steele continued.
"I would hope these techniques would guide journalists to report from a position of independence that does not ignore our beliefs and biases, but keeps them in check," he said.
While an ethics code cannot be applied to every situation, such guidelines can be used as a guidebook for journalists to make intelligent decisions.
"The important thing is to be able to realize when you're in a difficult ethical situation and have a discussion in the newsroom about the right course of action. To weigh the possible actions, consequences and which areas you are willing to compromise on," Hanson said.
At the same time, he observed, journalists faced with tight deadlines may not have the luxury of a newsroom conversation on the ethical pros and cons.
"I believe it is important for every news organization to have clear standards, but not rules because rules imply rigidity and do not allow for decision on individual cases," Steele concluded.
-- By Liz Harper, Online NewsHour
Posted by mmJun
http://insidebuzz.tripod.com
" Expose on the false entertainment stories
on talented music artists like Regine Velasquez. "
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
|
