tag:theconversation.com,2011:/id/topics/media-ethics-3818/articlesMedia ethics – The Conversation2024-02-14T13:20:41Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2208342024-02-14T13:20:41Z2024-02-14T13:20:41ZWildlife selfies harm animals − even when scientists share images with warnings in the captions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575067/original/file-20240212-26-k6xljg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C13%2C3039%2C2253&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The right way to photograph wildlife: from a distance, in the animal's natural habitat.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://flic.kr/p/D9s93c">Jim Peaco, Yellowstone National Park/Flickr</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the biggest privileges of <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=Jd5jwiwAAAAJ&hl=en">being a primatologist</a> is spending time in remote locations with monkeys and apes, living near these animals in their habitats and experiencing their daily lives. As a 21st-century human, I have an immediate impulse to take pictures of these encounters and share them on social media. </p>
<p>Social media can help scientists raise awareness of the species we study, promote their conservation and obtain jobs and research funding. However, sharing images of wild animals online can also contribute to illegal animal trafficking and <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-hike-so-close-to-me-how-the-presence-of-humans-can-disturb-wildlife-up-to-half-a-mile-away-162223">harmful human-wildlife interactions</a>. For endangered or threatened species, this attention can <a href="https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069215">put them at further risk</a>. </p>
<p>My research seeks to find ways for scientists and conservationists to harness the power of social media while avoiding its pitfalls. My colleague, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=VIynAt0AAAAJ&hl=en">ecologist and science communicator Cathryn Freund</a>, and I think we have some answers. In our view, wildlife professionals should never include themselves in pictures with animals. We also believe that featuring infant animals and animals interacting with humans leads viewers to think about these creatures in ways that are counterproductive to conservation. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/pN-FkkUXYOU?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">A wildlife biologist explains how and why to photograph wild animals at a safe distance.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Show and tell?</h2>
<p>Many conservation biologists are thinking hard about what role social media can and should play in their work. For example, the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Section on Human-Primate Interactions has issued guidelines for <a href="https://human-primate-interactions.org/best-practice-guidelines-responsible-images-of-non-human-primates/">how to use images of wild primates</a> and <a href="https://human-primate-interactions.org/responsible-primate-watching-for-tourists/">how to conduct primate watching tours</a>. </p>
<p>These guidelines recommend that when scientists show photos of themselves with a wild primate, the caption should state that the person in the image is a trained researcher or conservationist. However, there isn’t much data assessing whether this approach is effective. </p>
<p>We wanted to test whether people actually read these captions and whether informative captions helped curb viewers’ desires to have similar experiences or to own the animal as a pet. </p>
<p>In a study published in 2023, my colleagues and I created two mock Instagram posts – one showing a human near a wild gorilla, the other focusing on a gloved human hand holding a <a href="https://www.wwfindia.org/about_wwf/priority_species/lesser_known_species/slender_loris/">slender loris</a> – a small lemurlike primate native to Southeast Asia. Half of these photos carried basic captions like “Me with a mountain gorilla” or “Me with my research subject”; the other half included more detailed captions that also stated, “All animals are observed” (gorilla) or “captured and handled (loris) safely and humanely for research with the proper permits and training.” </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A photo shows a gloved hand holding a small primate, with a caption stating that the animal was captured and handled humanely for research with proper permits and training." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=916&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/570968/original/file-20240123-29-9n8222.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1151&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A mock Instagram post with a caption stating that the person shown is a trained researcher working with the loris under official rules. Many viewers in a study said the post nonetheless made them want to handle a loris themselves.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Smitha Gnanaolivu/Wildlife Rescue and Rehabilitation Bangalore</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We showed over 3,000 adults one of these mock Instagram posts and asked them to complete a survey. The results shocked us.</p>
<p>Viewers who saw the Instagram posts with the more detailed caption recognized that the picture depicted research. But regardless of the caption, more than half of the viewers agreed or strongly agreed that they would want to seek out a similar experience with the loris or gorilla. </p>
<p>Over half of the viewers agreed or strongly agreed that <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14199">they would want these animals as pets</a> and that the animals would make good pets. Presumably, participants did not know anything about the animals’ life habits, behavior or survival needs, or that neither of these species is at all suited to be a pet.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="InstagramEmbed" data-react-props="{"url":"https://www.instagram.com/p/CP7MAi6gJM9/?utm_source=ig_web_copy_link\u0026igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==","accessToken":"127105130696839|b4b75090c9688d81dfd245afe6052f20"}"></div></p>
<h2>Why media impact matters</h2>
<p>While these responses may sound merely sentimental or naive, research shows that media – particularly social media – contribute to harmful human encounters with wildlife and to the exotic pet trade. </p>
<p>For example, the Harry Potter films and books, which featured owls as magical creatures used by wizards, led to a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.04.004">sharp increase in the illegal owl trade in Indonesia</a>. Owls once were collectively known in Indonesia as “Burung Hantu,” or “ghost bird,” but now in the country’s bird markets they are commonly called “Burung Harry Potter.” </p>
<p>Studies show that images of people holding lorises drive illegal captures and sales of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1017/S0030605317000680">lorises and other primates</a>. Owners then post further videos showing them handling the animals improperly – for example, <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpV7L--cQ8s">tickling the loris</a>, which makes it raise its arms. Viewers see this behavior as cute, but in fact the animals do this to activate <a href="https://nationalzoo.si.edu/animals/pygmy-slow-loris">toxic glands in their upper arms</a> and move venom to their mouths <a href="https://brill.com/view/journals/ijfp/86/6/article-p534_5.xml">in preparation to defend themselves</a>. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/LJxUP_hME2g?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">Social media channels do a poor job of detecting and policing posts that feature exotic or endangered animals, and they allow dealers to market directly to the public.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In earlier research, we found that when orangutan rescue and rehabilitation centers feature baby orangutans and humans interacting with orangutans in YouTube videos, these posts <a href="https://doi.org/10.1002/pan3.10268">received more views</a> than videos of adult orangutans or orangutans not interacting with people. However, people who watched videos showing infant orangutans, or humans interacting with the animals, posted comments that were less supportive of orangutan conservation. They also stated more frequently that they wanted to own orangutans as pets or interact with them.</p>
<p>Many people who seek out wildlife encounters are not aware of the harm that these experiences cause. Animals <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-is-spillover-bird-flu-outbreak-underscores-need-for-early-detection-to-prevent-the-next-big-pandemic-200494">can transmit diseases to humans</a>, but it also works the other way: Humans can <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-85877-3_59-1">transmit potentially deadly diseases to wild animals</a>, including measles, herpes viruses and flu viruses. </p>
<p>When humans move through an animal’s habitat – or worse, handle or chase the animal – they cause stress reactions and <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-hike-so-close-to-me-how-the-presence-of-humans-can-disturb-wildlife-up-to-half-a-mile-away-162223">alter the animal’s behavior</a>. Animals may avoid feeding sites or spend time and energy fleeing instead of foraging. </p>
<p>Owning wild animals as pets is even more problematic. I have worked with several rescue and rehabilitation centers that shelter orangutans formerly kept as pets or tourist attractions. These animals typically are in very poor health and have to be taught how to socialize, move through trees and find their own food, since they have been deprived of these natural behaviors. </p>
<p>The last thing that any responsible conservation biologist studying endangered species wants to do is encourage this kind of human-wildlife contact.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A brown primate reaches from a cage to grasp a gloved human hand." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/575068/original/file-20240212-31-tgo7jv.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A vet at the Aceh natural resources conservation agency in Indonesia inspects a rescued gibbon that was formerly kept as an exotic pet.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/vet-inspects-an-owa-or-white-handed-gibbon-at-the-aceh-news-photo/1216848394">Chaideer Mahyuddin/AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Comment instead of sharing</h2>
<p>Many well-meaning <a href="https://theconversation.com/even-scientists-take-selfies-with-wild-animals-heres-why-they-shouldnt-61252">researchers and conservationists</a>, along with <a href="https://www.fastcompany.com/90906039/yellowstone-national-park-animal-selfies-danger-influencers-warning">members of the public</a>, have posted images of themselves near wild animals on social media. I did it too, before I understood the consequences. </p>
<p>Our findings indicate that caption information is not enough to keep people from seeking out animal encounters. As we see it, the answer is for researchers to stop taking and sharing these pictures with the general public. </p>
<p>When scientists create posts, we recommend selecting images that show only wildlife, in as natural a context as possible, or only people in the field – not both together. Researchers, conservationists and the public can go back through their social media history and delete or crop images that show human-wildlife interaction. </p>
<p>Scientists can also reach out to people who post images of humans interacting with wild animals, explain why the images can be harmful and suggest taking them down. Leading by example and sharing this information are simple actions that can save animals’ lives.</p>
<p><em><a href="https://www.cathrynfreund.com/">Cathryn Freund</a>, director of science communication at the Phillip and Patricia Frost Museum of Science in Miami, contributed to this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/220834/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrea l. DiGiorgio has received funding from The National Science Foundation and Princeton University. She is a participating member of the IUCN's SSC Primate Specialist Group Section on Human-Primate Interactions. </span></em></p>The caption may say that only scientists and trained professionals should handle wild animals, but viewers remember the image, not the words.Andrea L. DiGiorgio, Lecturer and Post Doctoral Researcher in Biological Anthropology, Princeton UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2223822024-02-01T01:06:05Z2024-02-01T01:06:05ZNine was slammed for ‘AI editing’ a Victorian MP’s dress. How can news media use AI responsibly?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/572616/original/file-20240131-17-f3bxeg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=526%2C155%2C3000%2C1670&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Nine News/Georgie Purcell via X/The Conversation</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Earlier this week, Channel Nine published an altered image of Victorian MP Georgie Purcell that showed her in a midriff-exposing tank top. The outfit was actually a dress.</p>
<p>Purcell chastised the channel for the image manipulation and accused it of being sexist. Nine <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/nine-apologises-for-altered-image-of-victorian-mp-20240130-p5f13l.html">apologised for the edit and blamed it</a> on an artificial intelligence (AI) tool in Adobe Photoshop.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1752088649527853107"}"></div></p>
<p>Generative AI has become increasingly prevalent over the past six months, as popular image editing and design tools like Photoshop and Canva have started integrating AI features into their programs. </p>
<p>But what are they capable of, exactly? Can they be blamed for doctored images? As these tools become more widespread, learning more about them and their dangers – alongside opportunities – is increasingly important.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/ai-to-z-all-the-terms-you-need-to-know-to-keep-up-in-the-ai-hype-age-203917">AI to Z: all the terms you need to know to keep up in the AI hype age</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>What happened with the photo of Purcell?</h2>
<p>Typically, making AI-generated or AI-augmented images involves “prompting” – using text commands to describe what you want to see or edit. </p>
<p>But late last year, Photoshop unveiled a new feature, <a href="https://helpx.adobe.com/au/photoshop/using/generative-fill.html">generative fill</a>. Among its options is an “expand” tool that can <a href="https://helpx.adobe.com/au/photoshop/using/generative-expand.html">add content to images</a>, even without text prompts.</p>
<p>For example, to expand an image beyond its original borders, a user can simply extend the canvas and Photoshop will “imagine” content that could go beyond the frame. This ability is powered by <a href="https://www.adobe.com/products/firefly.html">Firefly</a>, Adobe’s own generative AI tool. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/UVlwCAivA7I?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Nine resized the image to better fit its television composition but, in doing so, also generated new parts of the image that weren’t there originally.</p>
<p>The source material – and if it’s cropped – are of critical importance here.</p>
<p>In the above example where the frame of the photo stops around Purcell’s hips, Photoshop just extends the dress as might be expected. But if you use generative expand with a more tightly cropped or composed photo, Photoshop has to “imagine” more of what is going on in the image, with variable results.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NeySGk7xWhg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Is it legal to alter someone’s image like this? It’s ultimately up to the courts to decide. It depends on the jurisdiction and, among other aspects, the risk of reputational harm. If a party can argue that publication of an altered image has caused or could cause them “<a href="https://www.artslaw.com.au/information-sheet/defamation-law/">serious harm</a>”, they might have a defamation case.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australia-plans-to-regulate-high-risk-ai-heres-how-to-do-that-successfully-221321">Australia plans to regulate 'high-risk' AI. Here's how to do that successfully</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>How else is generative AI being used?</h2>
<p>Generative fill is just one way news organisations are using AI. Some are also using it to make or publish images, including photorealistic ones, depicting current events. An example of this is the ongoing <a href="https://www.crikey.com.au/2023/11/01/israel-gaza-adobe-artificial-intelligence-images-fake-news/">Israel-Hamas conflict</a>.</p>
<p>Others use it in place of stock photography or to create illustrations for hard-to-visualise topics, like <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/glenngow/2024/01/28/revealing-the-dark-side-the-top-6-problems-with-chatgpt-and-generative-ai-in-2024/?sh=33ba8966349a">AI itself</a>.</p>
<p>Many adhere to institutional or industry-wide codes of conduct, such as the <a href="https://www.meaa.org/meaa-media/code-of-ethics/">Journalist Code of Ethics</a> from the Media, Entertainment & Arts Alliance of Australia. This states journalists should “present pictures and sound which are true and accurate” and disclose “any manipulation likely to mislead.” </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/should-the-media-tell-you-when-they-use-ai-to-report-the-news-what-consumers-should-know-213693">Should the media tell you when they use AI to report the news? What consumers should know</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Some outlets do not use AI-generated or augmented images at all, or only when reporting on such images if they go viral.</p>
<p>Newsrooms can also benefit from generative AI tools. An example includes uploading a spreadsheet to a service like ChatGPT-4 and receiving suggestions on how to visualise the data. Or using it to help create a three-dimensional model that illustrates how a process works or how an event unfolded.</p>
<h2>What safeguards should media have for responsible generative AI use?</h2>
<p>I’ve spent the last year <a href="https://journalistik.online/en/paper-en/generative-visual-ai-in-newsrooms/">interviewing</a> photo editors and people in related roles about how they use generative AI and what policies they have in place to do so safely.</p>
<p>I’ve learned that some media outlets bar their staff from using AI to generate any content. Others allow it only for non-realistic illustrations, such as using AI to create a bitcoin symbol or illustrate a story about finance. </p>
<p>News outlets, according to editors I spoke to, want to be transparent with their audiences about the content they create and how it is edited.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1642168620745732096"}"></div></p>
<p>In 2019, Adobe started <a href="https://contentauthenticity.org/our-members">the Content Authenticity Initiative</a>, which now includes major media organisations, image libraries and multimedia companies. This has led to the rollout of <a href="https://contentcredentials.org/">content credentials</a>, a digital history of what equipment was used to make an image and what edits have been done to it.</p>
<p>This has been touted as a way to be more transparent with AI-generated or augmented content. But content credentials are not widely used yet. Besides, audiences shouldn’t outsource their critical thinking to a third party.</p>
<p>In addition to transparency, news editors I spoke to were sensitive to AI potentially displacing human labour. Many outlets strive to use only AI generators that have been trained with proprietary content. This is because of the <a href="https://www.reuters.com/legal/litigation/artists-take-new-shot-stability-midjourney-updated-copyright-lawsuit-2023-11-30/">ongoing cases</a> in jurisdictions around the world over AI training data and whether resulting generations breach copyright. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-new-york-times-copyright-lawsuit-against-openai-could-potentially-transform-how-ai-and-copyright-work-221059">How a New York Times copyright lawsuit against OpenAI could potentially transform how AI and copyright work</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Lastly, news editors said they are aware of the potential for <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21670811.2023.2229883">bias in AI generations</a>, given the unrepresentative data AI models are trained on.</p>
<p>This year, the World Economic Forum has named AI-fuelled misinformation and disinformation as the world’s greatest <a href="https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2024/01/ai-disinformation-global-risks/">short-term risk</a>. It placed this above even disasters like extreme weather events, inflation and armed conflict. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=600&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/572608/original/file-20240131-25-bln54d.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The top ten risks as outlined in the World Economic Forum’s Global Risk Report 2024.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.weforum.org/publications/global-risks-report-2024/shareables-e366ac1455/">World Economic Forum, Global Risks Perception Survey 2023–2024</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Because of this risk and the elections <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-than-4-billion-people-are-eligible-to-vote-in-an-election-in-2024-is-this-democracys-biggest-test-220837">happening in the United States</a> and around the world this year, engaging in healthy scepticism about what you see online is a must. </p>
<p>As is being thoughtful about where you get your news and information from. Doing so makes you better equipped to participate in a democracy, and less likely to fall for scams.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/222382/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>T.J. Thomson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p>Generative AI is everywhere, including licensed software tools that news media use for their work. Everyone needs to learn more about these features, their risks and benefits.T.J. Thomson, Senior Lecturer in Visual Communication & Digital Media, RMIT UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2181002023-11-20T03:16:40Z2023-11-20T03:16:40ZABC chief is right: impartiality is paramount when reporting the Israel-Gaza war<p>On November 17, the ABC’s editor-in-chief and managing director, David Anderson, <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/not-our-place-to-use-terms-like-genocide-and-apartheid-says-abc-boss-20231117-p5ekrx.html">was interviewed</a> on Radio 774, the ABC’s local station in Melbourne, about criticisms of the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/listen/programs/melbourne-mornings/abc-managing-director-david-anderson-news-editorial-coverage/103119010">national broadcaster’s coverage</a> of the Israel-Gaza war.</p>
<p>The interview followed <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/culture/tv-and-radio/abc-journalists-criticise-broadcaster-s-coverage-of-gaza-invasion-20231108-p5eijd.html?btis=">a well-publicised meeting</a> nine days earlier at which ABC journalists raised a range of concerns about the organisation’s coverage. These included the extent to which the ABC was relying on talking points supplied by the Israeli Defence Force (IDF), and the alleged unwillingness of the ABC to use terms such as “invasion”, “occupation”, “genocide”, “apartheid” and “ethnic cleansing” when discussing Israeli government policy.</p>
<p>Concern was also reportedly expressed about what was said to be a blanket ban on the use of the word “Palestine”, with journalists from Muslim and Arab backgrounds saying there was a perception in their communities that the ABC was too pro-Israel.</p>
<p>It was also reported that senior managers acknowledged they had removed a specialist verification team because of the impact that work was having on staff. Instead, they were relying on ad-hoc advice from former Middle East correspondents.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/1YiUXEdbY8U?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>David Anderson addressed many of these concerns in the Radio 774 interview. </p>
<p>In particular, he said while the ABC did include terms such as “genocide” and “apartheid” in reports of statements made by others, it was not prepared to adopt them itself. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Genocide is a claim that’s being made. It’s a serious crime. It’s an allegation of a crime. The IDF and Israel reject that. Same with apartheid. We’ll report other people’s use of that. We won’t use it ourselves.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>On the issue of alleged over-reliance on the IDF, Anderson was more equivocal. He said he wasn’t sure that was the case, but pointed out the difficulty of verifying material coming out of the war. “I think we’re trying to verify as much as we can.”</p>
<p>In terms of alienating local communities whose people are involved in the conflict, he said it came with the journalistic territory: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>We know that there are some people who will be offended by reporting one perspective or another. It’s our job and what’s enshrined in our charter. We don’t pick sides.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This response has generated a good deal of heat on social media, including an allegation that Anderson is acting out of fear by the stance he has taken on the use of the terms such as genocide and apartheid.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-exactly-is-a-ceasefire-and-why-is-it-so-difficult-to-agree-on-one-in-gaza-217683">What exactly is a ceasefire, and why is it so difficult to agree on one in Gaza?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>At the heart of this discussion is one of the fundamental tenets of professional journalism: impartiality in news reporting, which includes the separation of news from opinion.</p>
<p>Impartiality is not the product of fear: it is the very reverse. It is the product of courageous efforts to be accurate, fair, balanced, open-minded, and unconflicted by personal interest, especially in the face of unrelenting pressure and highly charged emotions. It takes guts.</p>
<p>It takes guts because when damaging facts or allegations are reported, partisan interests affected negatively will accuse the journalist or the platform of favouring the other side. In no area of journalism is this more insistently demonstrated than in the reporting of the decades-long conflict between Israelis and Palestinians.</p>
<p>Yet impartiality requires that important facts, once verified, be reported regardless of the anticipated blow-back. The same applies to serious allegations for which there is credible evidence.</p>
<p>Verification is foundational to accuracy. But in today’s world, journalists must navigate a landscape where fakery and misrepresentation have become not just art forms in images and text, but political dynamite. War makes the verification challenge even harder because of the combined effects of secrecy, confusion and the opportunities for propaganda.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PIzlfQ4al6M?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In addition to accuracy, impartiality requires that the language used should be calibrated to a fair portrayal of events, and that a story should achieve balance by following the weight of evidence.</p>
<p>The question of evidence brings us to yet another fundamental principle, both of law and of journalistic ethics: the strength of the evidence required to support an allegation must be commensurate with the gravity of the allegation. In law it is called the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Briginshaw_v_Briginshaw#:%7E:text=It%20essentially%20means%20that%20the,a%20standard%20ought%20be%20reached.">Briginshaw principle</a>. Getting that kind of evidence in the midst of war is difficult, but the imperatives of impartiality require that those accused should at least have the opportunity to reply.</p>
<p>A third challenge in stories where the nation has taken a clear position, as Australia has in its support for Israel, is that there is always pressure to report in ways that support the official narrative. Sometimes that pressure comes from within a media organisation, sometimes from outside and sometimes from both. It can become insidious, almost subconscious.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/gaza-war-reporting-from-the-frontline-of-conflict-has-always-raised-hard-ethical-questions-217570">Gaza war: reporting from the frontline of conflict has always raised hard ethical questions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>To partisans, these might all seem like pussyfooting abstractions. But from a journalist’s perspective they lie at the heart of good professional practice, and Anderson’s approach as outlined in his interview was that of an editor-in-chief striving for impartiality and prepared to endure the backlashes that come with it.</p>
<p>Without independent evidence, the ABC is right not to adopt for itself terms such as “genocide” and “apartheid”, but equally it is right to report others making such allegations. These highly contested and emotive terms are often used for their rhetorical power, which is the province of partisans but not of journalists seeking to be impartial.</p>
<p>Impartiality matters because it provides the bedrock of reliable information people need if they are to make up their own minds free of the manipulation that results when news reporting is tainted by partisanship. That is why it is built into the ABC charter and why Anderson is right in his determination to uphold it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/218100/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Without independent evidence, the ABC is right not to adopt for itself terms such as ‘genocide’ and ‘apartheid’, but equally it is right to report others making such allegations.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2149612023-10-15T07:45:14Z2023-10-15T07:45:14ZHow did the media perform on the Voice referendum? Let’s talk about truth-telling and impartiality<p>The rules by which politics are conducted have changed dramatically, especially since the rise of Trumpism. Yet the professional mass media continue to cover politics in ways that are no longer fit for purpose.</p>
<p>This has created distortions in the way the public discourse unfolds – distortions that have been on full display during the Voice referendum debate.</p>
<p>It presents a complex challenge to journalists and editors about how to simultaneously meet their obligations to truth-telling and impartiality, because there is now an unresolved tension between these two professional standards.</p>
<p>Truth-telling requires that lies and misrepresentations are either not published or refuted; impartiality requires that voices on all sides of a debate be heard, especially if they are the voices of people in positions of influence.</p>
<p>What happens, then, when influential voices on one side of a debate engage in obvious falsehoods?</p>
<p>Take two examples from the Voice debate: Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2023/aug/25/indigenous-voice-to-parliament-referendum-aec-poll-unfairness-claims-rejected">allegation</a> that the Australian Electoral Commission had rigged the referendum outcome by accepting ticks but not crosses as indicative of voting intention, and Senator Jacinta Nampijinpa Price’s claim that colonialisation has had a positive impact on First Nations Australians.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/_ZsWHSt0KP8?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>In the pre-Trump era, journalists could have counted on the self-righting process of politics to kick in, governed by conventions that repudiated gross falsehoods and imposed consequences.</p>
<p>A completely baseless allegation by a leader of the opposition that the voting system was rigged would probably have finished his career on the grounds that he had undermined public confidence in the electoral process.</p>
<p>And an outlandish claim of the kind made by Price would have been quickly rebutted by other public voices referring to the facts from Closing the Gap, the findings of various royal commissions and countless other sources of reputable data on Aboriginal disadvantage.</p>
<p>Instead, Dutton sails on as leader of a party that seems to think his conduct unremarkable, perhaps even politically advantageous, while Price begins to be spoken about in certain circles as a potential prime minister.</p>
<p>So the pre-Trumpian self-righting process can no longer be relied on. The old expectation that by exposing misrepresentations of this kind, the media will be holding these public figures to account is dead. Instead, it just gives them publicity.</p>
<p>At the same time, the responsible elements of the professional mass media try to adhere to established standards of truth-telling and impartiality by publishing rebuttals or condemnations.</p>
<p>In the Dutton case, The Australian published <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/commentary/coalitions-claims-on-rigged-voice-vote-must-be-called-out/news-story/fe0eecbc0c3cdb7dcd31d5c12c192517">a sharp response</a> from the constitutional lawyer George Williams, calling out Dutton’s “irresponsible and harmful” conduct. In the Price case, her comments provoked a backlash published in many newspapers, including the Canberra Times, where <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8350469/indigenous-minister-blasts-comments-about-colonisation/">her remarks were condemned</a> as “offensive” by the Minister for Indigenous Australians Linda Burney.</p>
<p>This is all very well, but these responses appear days after the initial misrepresentations. In that time, the damage is done, the social media beast has devoured and regurgitated them in almost unrecognisable form, and public attention has long ago been diverted to some newer excitement. By then, to quote Winston Churchill, the lie has gone halfway around the world before truth has got its boots on.</p>
<p>There is no easy and conclusive answer to this dilemma. But there are some steps the media could take to make it less acute.</p>
<p>First, it requires a commitment from the media not to indulge in disinformation of its own. During the Voice debate, for example, several News Corporation mastheads – though not all – published an article claiming the Uluru Statement from the Heart was not one page but 20-plus pages, and included references to treaties and reparations, none of which formed part of the statement or the proposed Voice.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/journalists-reporting-on-the-voice-to-parliament-do-voters-a-disservice-with-he-said-she-said-approach-204361">Journalists reporting on the Voice to Parliament do voters a disservice with 'he said, she said' approach</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This was too much even for some other News Corp journalists, who pointed out that the document referred to was not the statement itself but a record of meetings and discussions leading up to it.</p>
<p>The second step the media could take requires the application of a few filters. The first is: does this need to be run at all? If the answer is yes, then how can a neutralising antidote be delivered at the same time? Or can this wait until the speaker can be challenged on it?</p>
<p>The third – and some in the media are already doing this – is to confront the threat disinformation poses by drawing attention to examples and calling them out. During the Voice debate, articles of this kind appeared in the Canberra Times and The Age, as well as in the George Williams article in The Australian referred to earlier.</p>
<p>So much for truth-telling: now for impartiality.</p>
<p>Impartiality does not oblige a broadcaster or publisher to ventilate lies, fantasies or misrepresentations as if they are true.</p>
<p>It is not a failure of impartiality to call Dutton’s utterance a baseless allegation at the time of reporting it. It is accurate and it is fair, two vital elements in impartiality.</p>
<p>It is not a failure of impartiality to report Price’s remarks and in the next paragraph point out that this view is refutable by reference to whatever data seem most apt.</p>
<p>Another element in the impartiality equation is balance. Balance is not about giving equal time, space or prominence to each or every side of a story. Balance follows the weight of evidence.</p>
<p>In the context of the referendum, it is false balance to give equal weight to the claim that the proposed Constitutional amendment would import a divisive race-based element into the Constitution, and to the constitutional lawyers’ opinion that it does no such thing.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/an-indigenous-voice-to-parliament-will-not-give-special-rights-or-create-a-veto-196574">An Indigenous Voice to Parliament will not give 'special rights' or create a veto</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The fact is that the Constitution already contains two race-based clauses: 25 and 51, the latter known specifically as the “race power”. Reporting the claim of racial divisiveness without the contradicting facts is a failure of balance.</p>
<p>Giving effect to these remedies requires close scrutiny of potential content and rigorous editorial decision-making.</p>
<p>The alternative – still widely used – is to fall back on that discredited and outdated approach called “he said/she said” journalism. This is where the damaging content is presented as a plausible point of view, someone else is quoted as opposing it, and the public is left to figure out the truth for itself.</p>
<p>This is against the public interest. Lies and misrepresentations are not just another set of truths – what Trump’s one-time press assistant Kellyanne Conway called “alternative facts”. They corrode trust. No one knows where to turn for reliable information, and the ground is prepared for yet more conspiracy theories to take root.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214961/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The “he said/she said” reporting of yesteryear no longer serves a democratic purpose. Media must do better at calling out lies and misinformation.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2043612023-05-01T20:01:19Z2023-05-01T20:01:19ZJournalists reporting on the Voice to Parliament do voters a disservice with ‘he said, she said’ approach<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/523104/original/file-20230426-18-3i5rey.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Lukas Coch/AAP</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>For much of the past two decades, polarisation and hyper-partisanship have weakened Western democracies, most notably in the United States and Britain. Australia has not escaped, although the consequences here have been nothing as compared with Brexit or the insurrection in Washington on January 6, 2021.</p>
<p>Social media has been the primary agent of this democratic dysfunction, but parts of the professional mass media have also contributed.</p>
<p>Impartial news reporting is an antidote to polarisation. The Voice referendum, with its impassioned arguments on both sides, presents the Australian media with an opportunity to show their capacity for truth-telling and impartiality.</p>
<p>While the overall performance so far is patchy, there does seem to be a lessening in the polarisation that was such a significant feature of federal political reporting between the overthrow of Kevin Rudd by Julia Gillard in 2010 and the defeat of the Morrison government in 2021.</p>
<p>A straw in the wind was <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/raging-moral-coercion-on-voice-is-failing/news-story/e3dc9a7cce2ce0fd85bd525ba30d0e7d">a column</a> by Chris Mitchell, the former editor-in-chief of The Australian, in a recent commentary on coverage of the referendum. While supportive of the referendum’s critics, he made an appeal to both sides to respect the other. </p>
<p>It was an important point. As the Harvard political scholars Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt have argued in their book <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/562246/how-democracies-die-by-steven-levitsky-and-daniel-ziblatt/">How Democracies Die</a>, it is lack of respect for the opposing side that has been so corrosive of democracy, especially in the US, over the past two decades.</p>
<p>There are other signs the Australian media are approaching the task of covering the referendum in a way that serves the public interest. Many platforms, for example <a href="https://www.canberratimes.com.au/story/8156075/the-voice-to-parliament-referendum-what-it-is-how-it-will-be-conducted-and-what-it-means/">the Canberra Times</a> and the <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RCnv3G0rDLo">ABC</a>, have published factual and straightforward “explainers” setting out the basics of the referendum.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/RCnv3G0rDLo?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>This is one way in which the media are doing their essential job of providing the public with a bedrock of reliable information. Another is by tracking public opinion through polls, and these have been reported at frequent intervals, revealing a slow but steady increase in support for the Voice proposal.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/yes-vote-for-the-voice-is-leading-in-every-state-and-territory-poll-20230429-p5d482.html">latest YouGov poll</a> is particularly informative because it shows results state-by-state as well as nationally. On those data, the “yes” side has majority support nationally and in four of the six states, which meets the double-majority requirement for a referendum to succeed. </p>
<p>So far so good in terms of coverage. But achieving impartiality in news is also challenging the media to abandon some bad old habits, and not everyone so far is up to the task.</p>
<p>There are plentiful examples where journalists have succumbed to the temptation to fall back on the simplest, safest yet professionally inadequate way to achieve impartiality: by simply reporting what someone says and then finding someone else to oppose it.</p>
<p>It is tempting because it saves time and does not demand independent evaluative thinking. It is professionally inadequate because it is journalism as stenography, rightly dismissed nowadays as “he said, she said” journalism.</p>
<p>The result is that absurd or far-fetched propositions go unchallenged other than by an opposing political voice. When this happens, journalism’s evaluative element goes missing, leaving the audience to figure out the rights and wrongs for themselves.</p>
<p>Maintaining impartiality does not require the media to publish nonsense, and certainly does not require them to publish nonsense without drawing attention to the facts or contrary evidence.</p>
<p>The starkest examples come from stories about the scope and power of the proposed Voice.</p>
<p>There is plenty of material against which to test what people say about this:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>the <a href="https://voice.gov.au/">final report</a> of the Indigenous Voice Co-design group, which is the basis for the government’s approach </p></li>
<li><p><a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Aboriginal_and_Torres_Strait_Islander_Voice_Referendum/VoiceReferendum/Submissions">submissions</a> to the parliamentary select committee inquiring into the matter from constitutional experts </p></li>
<li><p>the opinion of Commonwealth Solicitor-General Stephen Donaghue, contained in <a href="https://www.aph.gov.au/Parliamentary_Business/Committees/Joint/Aboriginal_and_Torres_Strait_Islander_Voice_Referendum/VoiceReferendum/Submissions">his submission</a> to that inquiry </p></li>
<li><p>the <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fems%2Fr7019_ems_30a282a6-7b5a-4659-b9cb-13da5698bca1%22;src1=sm1">exact wording</a> of the proposed constitutional amendment.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>The best of the reporting so far imposes these tests. A good example was the challenge on Melbourne commercial radio 3AW by Tony Jones to Sussan Ley, deputy leader of the Liberal Party, who opportunistically seized on the approach of Anzac Day to say the Voice could seek to alter Australia’s national public holidays. </p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BRDVxz2NXIk?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The worst of the reporting does not impose these tests. An example was a front-page story in The Australian, amplified by Sky News, in which Opposition Leader Peter Dutton <a href="https://www.skynews.com.au/australia-news/voice-to-parliament/voice-to-parliament-could-influence-every-decision-of-government-peter-dutton/video/2db297df2bcd68f9c89c49aa7a9f9b3b">said the Voice</a> could offer advice on interest rates. </p>
<p>Attempts like this to panic the population have their parallels in the scaremongering over native title 30 years ago. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/australian-politics-explainer-the-mabo-decision-and-native-title-74147">Australian politics explainer: the Mabo decision and native title</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Then, the likes of Jeff Kennett, as Liberal premier of Victoria, promoted the populist furphy – which <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/i-was-wrong-on-mabo-kennett-20020601-gdu9dt.html">he later repudiated</a> – that native title represented a threat to people’s backyard. </p>
<p>The <a href="https://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fems%2Fr7019_ems_30a282a6-7b5a-4659-b9cb-13da5698bca1%22;src1=sm1">proposed new section 129</a> of the Constitution, which would establish the Voice, states the function of the Voice in these terms:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice may make representations to the Commonwealth Parliament and the Executive Government of the Commonwealth on matters relating to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The key word is “representations”. As various legal opinions make clear, this word was carefully chosen in preference to “advice” because it has less forceful connotations.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-if-the-government-goes-against-the-advice-of-the-voice-to-parliament-200517">What happens if the government goes against the advice of the Voice to Parliament?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A second argument against the Voice – that its representations would lead to a cascade of litigation – can be tested against the opinions of Professor Emerita <a href="https://theconversation.com/what-happens-if-the-government-goes-against-the-advice-of-the-voice-to-parliament-200517">Anne Twomey</a>, Donaghue and other constitutional law experts, who say this would not happen.</p>
<p>A <a href="https://www.news.com.au/national/politics/pauline-hanson-slams-voice-to-parliament-as-australias-version-of-apartheid/news-story/b04fc5ac4052993b407ff109dc73118f">third argument</a> is that the Voice is a mechanism to enshrine racial difference as a feature of the Constitution. </p>
<p>The final report of the co-design group argues Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people are, in practice, the only racial groups in Australia for whom laws are made exclusively. The implication is that racial difference is already part of the basis for law-making in certain circumstances, and that fairness dictates those people directly affected by such laws should have a say in their formulation.</p>
<p>People who put forward arguments against the Voice deserve a fair hearing. Inconsistencies in the wording of some of the documentation raise legitimate questions, and it is also legitimate to question why the executive government has been included alongside the parliament as an institution to which the Voice can make representations.</p>
<p>However, impartiality requires that where answers to these questions exist, they should be reported, not left hanging in the air for the audience to make of it what they will. With an issue as ripe for polarisation as the Voice, that is not good enough.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/204361/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Maintaining impartiality does not require the media to publish nonsense, and certainly does not require them to publish nonsense without drawing attention to the facts or contrary evidence.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1963582022-12-12T19:02:59Z2022-12-12T19:02:59ZIs it ever okay for journalists to lie to get a story?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/500321/original/file-20221212-97751-s12rbl.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In a time of <a href="https://www.edelman.com.au/trust-barometer-2022-australia#:%7E:text=Trust%20in%20all%20media%20sources%20has%20fallen%2C%20with,media%20by%20only%2024%25%20of%20Australians%20%28-8%20points%29.">falling trust</a> in the news media, it is vital journalists do not engage in news-gathering methods that further harm their credibility. Thanks to the rise of social media, misinformation and disinformation are rampant. Trust in news matters, so we can tell fact from fiction. Without it, democracy suffers.</p>
<p>In our new book, Undercover Reporting, Deception and Betrayal in Journalism, we ask whether deception is ever an acceptable method for journalists to use. In other words, is it ever okay to lie to a target to get a story?</p>
<p>We find it can be ethically justifiable under very specific conditions. We offer a six-point checklist for journalists (and the audience) to test if deception and betrayal are warranted. </p>
<p>Deception is one of the most common ethical problems in journalism. It ranges in seriousness from misrepresentation to the use of undercover reporting. </p>
<p>In fact, it is so common that some argue it is inherent in what journalists do. The late American writer and journalist Janet Malcolm, for instance, in her renowned book <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/106480/the-journalist-and-the-murderer-by-janet-malcolm/">The Journalist and the Murderer</a>, said in her opening paragraph:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself [sic] to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people’s vanity, ignorance, or loneliness, gaining their trust, and betraying them without remorse.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>While we argue Malcolm pushes her argument too far, we present a range of case studies that show not only the range of deceptive practices in contemporary journalism, but also their seriousness. </p>
<p>Three of the case studies are drawn from high-profile undercover operations or acts of deception. </p>
<p>One concerns the use by <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2019/mar/17/the-cambridge-analytica-scandal-changed-the-world-but-it-didnt-change-facebook">Cambridge Analytica</a> of data gathered by Facebook on 87 million of its users worldwide. These data were used to influence elections in several countries, including the United States in 2016.</p>
<p>Another involved the infiltration by <a href="https://www.9news.com.au/national/al-jazeera-journo-defends-one-nation-sting/ff384357-35be-4247-bd94-078c2ade0572#:%7E:text=Al%20Jazeera%20reporter%20Rodger%20Muller%20posed%20as%20the,talking%20about%20getting%20millions%20in%20donations%20from%20them.">Al Jazeera</a> of the National Rifle Association in the US. It then repeated this with the One Nation party in Australia in 2019.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/QYyX7O02yOg?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>The third case is the deception and betrayal inflicted on thousands of innocent people in Britain by Rupert Murdoch’s News of the World newspaper in hacking their mobile phones. This is perhaps the most egregious example of journalists failing their ethical duty in Britain in the past century. </p>
<p>From our examination of these cases, including interviews with key journalists, and building on the work of two distinguished American journalists and scholars, <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/95291/the-elements-of-journalism-by-bill-kovach-and-tom-rosenstiel/">Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel</a>, we developed our six-point framework for assessing the ethical justification for the use of undercover techniques, including those of masquerade and entrapment.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/hacking-trial-verdict-coulson-guilty-and-brooks-cleared-but-end-of-an-era-for-the-red-tops-27753">Hacking trial verdict: Coulson guilty and Brooks cleared, but end of an era for the red tops</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Using this test, we concluded that the operation against Cambridge Analytica was ethically justified. It told the public important truths that we would not otherwise have known. The most notable of these was that Cambridge Analytica was in the business of interfering in sovereign elections – a direct threat to democratic wellbeing. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=337&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/500317/original/file-20221212-90872-3510zz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=423&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">News of the World hacking the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler is an example of when deception in journalism is completely unjustifiable.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Facundo Arrizabalaga/EPA/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But we also find that the operations against the NRA and One Nation were not justifiable; nor in any way could the phone hacking of celebrities and ordinary citizens such as the murdered schoolgirl <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2012/11/28/world/europe/milly-dowler-profile/index.html">Milly Dowler</a> ever be justified to produce stories for News of the World. </p>
<p>Our framework consists of these six questions:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Is the information sufficiently vital to the public interest to justify deception?</p></li>
<li><p>Were other methods considered and was deception the only way to get the story?</p></li>
<li><p>Was the use of deception revealed to the audience and the reasons explained?</p></li>
<li><p>Were there reasonable grounds for suspecting the target of the deception was engaged in activity contrary to the public interest?</p></li>
<li><p>Was the operation carried out with a risk strategy so it would not imperil a formal investigation by competent authorities?</p></li>
<li><p>Did the test of what is “sufficiently vital” to the public interest include an objective assessment of harm or wrongdoing?</p></li>
</ol>
<p>We consider a further case study to look at other aspects of deception and betrayal.</p>
<p>It concerns the deceptive conduct that goes under the general name of “hybrid journalism”. This is where advertising is presented in a way that is difficult to distinguish from news.</p>
<p>It goes under a variety of names such as “branded content”, “sponsored content” or “native advertising”. More recently, another label has come into fashion: “From our partners”. Reputable platforms use typography that distinguishes this from news content, but less reputable ones make it difficult to discern one from the other.</p>
<p>Journalists also engage in a range of more everyday deceptive practices. These include failing to declare oneself as a journalist; attempting to ingratiate oneself with a person by feigning a romantic interest in them; agreeing to publish information known to be untrue in order to serve the interests of a valued source; and ambushing a subject by having a microphone open or a camera rolling when the subject has no reason to think they are being recorded.</p>
<p>As these case studies show, deception and betrayal in journalism take many forms, and the ethical decisions surrounding them are far from straightforward. However, they are not inherent to the practice of journalism. Whether they are justifiable must be closely scrutinised, because the public’s trust in the media is at stake.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/196358/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrea Carson receives funding from the Australian Research Council.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A new book argues that very rarely it is ethically justifiable to deceive to get a story. But mostly it’s a dangerous and harmful practice that adds to the public’s mistrust of the media.Andrea Carson, Associate Professor, Department of Politics, Media and Philosophy, La Trobe UniversityDenis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1941222022-11-16T02:42:31Z2022-11-16T02:42:31ZHow the news media – long in thrall to Trump – can cover his new run for president responsibly<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/495546/original/file-20221116-13-kj7lkp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=25%2C50%2C5582%2C3682&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Members of the media prepare for Donald Trump's announcement that he is running for president in 2024.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/Election2024Trump/bb59c32fe35f490ab74da7ca90d05520/photo">AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Now that he’s in the 2024 presidential race, the media circus that is Donald Trump is returning for a new season.</p>
<p>Trump is still newsworthy. He’s been weakened by his defeat in the 2020 presidential election, his attempt to overthrow its result and the <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2022/11/14/coronavirus-midterm-elections-republicans/">underperformance of Republican candidates in the 2022 midterms</a>. Nevertheless, Trump is more than a party leader. “Make America Great Again,” known colloquially as “MAGA,” is a <a href="https://www.washington.edu/news/2021/02/05/new-nationwide-survey-shows-maga-supporters-beliefs-about-the-pandemic-the-election-and-the-insurrection/">political movement</a>. Trump has a <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-a-divided-america-including-the-15-who-are-maga-republicans-splits-on-qanon-racism-and-armed-patrols-at-polling-places-193378">legion of diehard followers</a>.</p>
<p>Then there’s Trump the storyline. Trump is to reporters as honey is to bears. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1077699018805212">Journalists prize conflict</a>, and Trump delivers it in abundance. It’s why he dominated news coverage <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/">nearly every week of his 2016 presidential run</a>; why he got <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-donald-trumps-first-100-days/">three times as much news coverage during his first 100 days</a> as president as did his immediate predecessors; and why he has remained in the news since leaving the White House. </p>
<p>He’s also an easy “get.” In an era where politicians are increasingly scripted and walled off from the media, Trump is at their doorstep. As president, <a href="https://cpj.org/reports/2020/04/trump-media-attacks-credibility-leaks/">he answered more questions from reporters than any of his recent predecessors</a>.</p>
<p>There’s a third reason that Trump will get the news media’s attention: He’s good for ratings. During the 2016 presidential election alone, he boosted cable television viewership so much that its advertising revenue rose by <a href="https://www.forbes.com/sites/brettedkins/2016/12/01/donald-trumps-election-delivers-massive-ratings-for-cable-news/?sh=69f06841119e">hundreds of millions of dollars</a>. Broadcasters benefited, too: CBS CEO Les Moonves famously declared that Trump’s presidential run “<a href="https://www.politico.com/blogs/on-media/2016/10/cbs-ceo-les-moonves-clarifies-donald-trump-good-for-cbs-comment-229996">may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS</a>.” <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/media/551210-tv-news-ratings-online-readership-plunge-during-bidens-first-100-days/">During Joe Biden’s presidency</a>, TV and online news viewership is <a href="https://www.axios.com/2022/07/12/news-media-readership-ratings-2022">down sharply from the Trump years</a>.</p>
<p>So the question is not whether Trump will get showered with news coverage, but how journalists should cover him. If they are to serve the public interest, journalists cannot apply the <a href="http://spj.org/ethicscode.asp">ordinary rules for covering</a> candidates. They are reporting on a politician who regularly defies democratic norms and lies with abandon. As a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.1996.9963131">longtime scholar of political journalism</a>, I offer some recommendations for giving due respect to Trump’s candidacy without amplifying his false claims or promoting his anti-democratic beliefs.</p>
<h2>Don’t play into his hand</h2>
<p>Trump is a master at changing the story when it’s not going in his direction or favor. To do that successfully, he relies on journalists to take the bait. Racing to air Trump’s latest outrage serves only to give him disproportionate coverage and to divert the public from what’s more deserving of its attention.</p>
<h2>Do call out his falsehoods, but don’t dwell on them</h2>
<p>When it’s impossible to ignore one of Trump’s false claims, label it as such in the story. At the same time, to report yet again that Trump is playing fast and loose with the facts is to say nothing novel or unexpected. The latest untruth might be tantalizing, but that alone doesn’t make it news. A 2015 <a href="https://towcenter.columbia.edu/news/lies-damn-lies-and-viral-content-how-news-websites-spread-and-debunk-online-rumors-unverified">Columbia University study</a> found news outlets “play a major role in propagating hoaxes, false claims, questionable rumors, and dubious viral content.” Journalists don’t typically make false claims of their own, but do air those of newsmakers. And once aired, the falsehoods get amplified on social media, where they take on a life of their own in part because <a href="https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/biases-make-people-vulnerable-to-misinformation-spread-by-social-media/">people tend to accept false claims that align with what they’d like to believe</a>. Few examples illustrate the point more clearly than <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/meetthepressblog/poll-61-republicans-still-believe-biden-didnt-win-fair-square-2020-rcna49630">the continuing belief of a sizable Republican majority that the 2020 election was stolen</a>.</p>
<h2>Don’t play up his social media provocations</h2>
<p>When Trump was president, <a href="https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/13/trump-tweets-legacy-of-lies-misinformation-distrust.html">one third of his most popular tweets</a> contained a false claim. But many Americans wouldn’t have heard them directly from Trump. A study found that <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/trump-tweets-one-percent-mainstream-media-769207">only about 1% of his Twitter followers</a> saw a tweet directly from his Twitter feed. Most Americans heard of his tweets through news coverage.</p>
<h2>Don’t confuse access with newsworthiness</h2>
<p>The offer of a Trump interview might be enticing, but unless the reporter has a clear purpose and pursues it doggedly, it will work only to the advantage of Trump, who is <a href="https://video.foxbusiness.com/v/6311112708112#sp=show-clips">a master at manipulating the agenda</a>. Instead of speaking with Trump to get insights on him, the University of Colorado’s Elizabeth Skewes suggests <a href="https://ethics.journalism.wisc.edu/tag/ben-carson/">getting them from people</a> who have worked with him or studied him closely. </p>
<h2>Do notice when he trashes democracy</h2>
<p>Obeying laws, respecting institutions and following standard expectations – sometimes called “<a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/562246/how-democracies-die-by-steven-levitsky-and-daniel-ziblatt/">democratic norms</a>” – are all critical to a healthy democracy. Journalists, as watchdogs of the powerful, are duty-bound to hold the powerful accountable, including Trump’s attacks on democracy and its institutions. But the danger that Trump poses to democracy does not grant reporters – who are purveyors of facts, not opinion – a license to judge his substantive policies. Journalists break their own norms by taking sides in partisan debates over policy issues like immigration and trade. Leave those judgments to the voters.</p>
<h2>Do avoid false equivalence</h2>
<p>A story about a Trump transgression does not inherently need a mention of <a href="https://www.democraticunderground.com/100212486266">something similar</a> involving a political opponent. Doing so can make Trump’s behavior look normal when it is not. He’s a serial transgressor of social and political expectations.</p>
<h2>Do provide context</h2>
<p>It’s not safe for journalists to assume news consumers know what’s happening either on the surface or behind the scenes of what they’re reporting. As far back as the 1940s, journalists were being criticized for <a href="https://archive.org/details/freeandresponsib029216mbp">offering their audiences too little context</a>. In recent years, journalists have sought to restore public trust in their work by being more transparent about news decisions. Context is a key piece of that, explaining why the story is newsworthy and why it’s being told in the way that it is.</p>
<h2>Don’t lump all Trump loyalists in the same basket</h2>
<p>The Trump followers who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, <a href="https://www.washington.edu/news/2021/02/05/new-nationwide-survey-shows-maga-supporters-beliefs-about-the-pandemic-the-election-and-the-insurrection/">are not fully representative of his followers</a>. Overlooked in the turmoil that followed the 2020 election is the fact that Trump received the second-most presidential votes in history. <a href="https://thecorrespondent.com/790/not-every-trump-voter-is-racist-or-misled-theres-a-rational-trump-voter-too">Simplistic portrayals</a> <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/04/24/the-nasty-effect-and-why-donald-trump-supporters-mistrust-the-media/">of Trump’s supporters</a> deepens their mistrust of the media and its reporting. </p>
<p>None of this will be easy. A century ago, journalist Walter Lippmann wrote that the press, rather than bringing order to political chaos, <a href="https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315127736">tends to “intensify” it</a>. Trump personifies chaos, and his news coverage has indeed been chaotic. As one analyst described it as far back as 2018, “<a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/395230-freak-show-coverage-of-trump-creating-media-chaos/">The press rushes from one out-of-proportion headline to the next</a>, focusing on the weird, the sensational and the polarizing.” More disciplined reporting would benefit the American people as the Trump circus takes its 2024 show on the road.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/194122/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thomas E. Patterson does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>There is a lot about Donald Trump that makes him attractive to the public, and alluring to the media. A scholar of political journalism has some suggestions about how to cover him.Thomas E. Patterson, Bradlee Professor of Government and the Press, Harvard Kennedy SchoolLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1906452022-09-14T20:03:45Z2022-09-14T20:03:45ZMedia coverage of Queen Elizabeth’s death began well, but quickly descended into farce<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/484589/original/file-20220914-18-bmfzf6.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=71%2C17%2C3910%2C1976&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Saturday front pages of major papers commemorating the Queen's death.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">News Corp Australia, Nine Entertainment</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In Australia, as in Britain and the United States, professional mass media are part of the Establishment. This status even has its own name: the fourth estate. So at times like the death of Queen Elizabeth II, the pressure to conform to political and social expectations is intense.</p>
<p>Those expectations include treating such a story as being of overwhelming importance, and preferring to promote unity over divisiveness, respectfulness over criticism, the status quo over radical change, politesse over frankness, and sentimentality over hard-headedness.</p>
<p>It is a time when the fourth estate puts aside its fundamental role of holding power to account so as not to risk being pilloried for betraying those expectations.</p>
<p>The end result is what we have seen in abundance since Queen Elizabeth II died on September 8 2022. If it looks like a reflection of Establishment interests, that’s because it is.</p>
<p>But it is also, to an immeasurable but unmistakable extent, a reflection of public expectations too.</p>
<p>Queen Elizabeth was the only head of state any Australian not in their seventies has ever known. The esteem in which she was held has been obvious for many years simply by virtue of the accepted political wisdom that the prospect of Australians voting for a republic in her lifetime was nil.</p>
<p>It is only fair, then, that any critique of the coverage be set against the background of those realities.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/484575/original/file-20220914-16-m87akh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=522&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Queen Elizabeth’s death was a huge story and it was right for the media to treat it as such. But it went on for too long and became increasingly banal.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press/AP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Australian media certainly treated this as a story of overwhelming importance. On the Friday and Saturday immediately following the Queen’s death this was amply shown by rolling television coverage, commemorative lift-outs and wraparounds in the newspapers, followed by extensive coverage on inside pages.</p>
<p>There is a fixed routine to covering events like this – a trunk story summarising the main news points, reaction from political leaders, tributes, stories of ordinary people’s encounters with the queen, a potted history of her reign, reminiscences of her visits to Australia. It was all there.</p>
<p>So was the shmaltzy tone. From the Sydney Morning Herald: her “lasting love for the harbour city” and “We did but see her passing by […]”.</p>
<p>However, there was also in the SMH and elsewhere clear-eyed analyses of the fragile state of the United Kingdom and the contrast between the two Elizabethan eras. In the late 16th century, England was growing into a mighty military and commercial power; the reign of Elizabeth II was a period of long-run decline.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-queen-has-left-her-mark-around-the-world-but-not-all-see-it-as-something-to-be-celebrated-190343">The Queen has left her mark around the world. But not all see it as something to be celebrated</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A striking aspect of the television coverage was that on the Friday night, Seven’s and Nine’s news bulletins heavily outrated the ABC’s. OzTAM TV ratings, from Australia’s five biggest cities, showed Seven News attracting 852,000 viewers, Nine News 736,000 and the ABC’s Queen Elizabeth II (1926-2022), only 201,000.</p>
<p>Even allowing for the fact the commercial bulletins usually out-rate the ABC’s, on a story like this it might be expected that the national broadcaster would at least close the gap.</p>
<p>However, over the weekend none of the networks’ news specials attracted many viewers. Seven’s coverage of the proclamation of Charles III attracted 279,000, its tribute to the Queen 136,000, and the ABC’s continuing coverage 206,000.</p>
<p>There is a lesson here. Public expectations about how stories of overwhelming importance are covered have clearly shifted. Rolling television coverage now loses impetus swiftly unless there is new material continuously replenishing it, as with the September 11 attacks on the US or bushfire emergencies. The same lesson probably applies to the print media also.</p>
<p>The steam had started to go out of the royal story by Saturday evening. The death of the Queen and the proclamation of the King had been done.</p>
<p>By Sunday, the only development was the start of the journey bringing the Queen’s body from Balmoral Castle to London.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/beheaded-and-exiled-the-two-previous-king-charleses-bookended-the-abolition-of-the-monarchy-190410">Beheaded and exiled: the two previous King Charleses bookended the abolition of the monarchy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Yet the ABC’s 7pm bulletin stuck with this for 24 minutes, nearly all of it rehashed from the previous day, and on Monday the newspapers were still giving over six or more forward news pages to it.</p>
<p>The coverage has just got more bizarre and banal by the day: clouds containing visions of the queen’s head or the queen on a horse; the new king losing his temper over a leaky fountain pen; a little girl who dresses up like the queen when she rides her horse; another little girl cuddling a corgi.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1569815859895607296"}"></div></p>
<p>Meanwhile, in Ukraine there has been a decisive thrust by Ukrainian forces, which has pushed the Russians out of a substantial part of the Donbas region.</p>
<p>There comes a point at which editors and news directors need to recognise that expectations about the big story have been met. That point was reached by Saturday evening. Then was the time to cut back hard and wait for the funeral.</p>
<p>The fact that thousands of dollars have been spent sending teams to London doesn’t justify clogging up the news with non-stories.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/190645/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The Australian media’s blanket coverage of the sovereign’s death was a reflection of public expectations, but it was allowed to drag on and became increasingly bizarre.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1870742022-07-20T03:06:12Z2022-07-20T03:06:12ZPlaying on good feelings: when ‘eudaimonic’ social media goes bad<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474745/original/file-20220719-40251-dsaco0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C621%2C5533%2C2749&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Twenty-something Melburnian Harrison Pawluck could be doing worse things than building a TikTok audience through “random acts of kindness”. </p>
<p>He’s not out on the streets pulling risky pranks or provoking angry confrontations. He doesn’t promote bogus cryptocurrency schemes, cancer cures or conspiracy theories. Instead <a href="https://www.tiktok.com/@lifeofharrison">he films strangers’ reactions</a> to him doing things such as paying for their groceries or handing them flowers. </p>
<p>Even so, the controversy sparked by his most successful video to date (viewed nearly 65 million times) underlines the problematic ethics of “feel-good” content – both for creators and consumers. </p>
<p>The 19-second video shows Pawluck asking an elderly woman in a food hall to hold a bouquet of flowers as he puts on a jacket. He then wishes her a lovely day and walks off. “I hope this made her day better,” the caption reads. It didn’t. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=274&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474772/original/file-20220719-12-ddkq8h.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Harrison’s</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Since becoming aware of the viral video, Melbourne woman Maree has <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/melbourne/programs/mornings/melbourne-woman-furious-at-being-subject-of-viral-tiktok-video/13969444">spoken out</a> about feeling patronised and exploited. Pawluk has offered <a href="https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/tv/current-affairs/aussie-tiktok-star-sorry-but-wont-stop-controversial-acts-of-kindness/news-story/347c18457d80a961e27c6b31f42b2507">an apology</a> of sorts, but said he won’t stop make such videos:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I know my true intentions and I know that, if I can inspire even 1% of the people that watch my content to go out there and do something good, I have done something that I believe is good for the world.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This defence would work better if Pawluck weren’t monetising his videos. The fact there’s a market for such content, however, raises questions. How can content be truly altruistic with so many commercial factors at play? </p>
<h2>What is eudaimonic media?</h2>
<p>From holding life-affirming signs in malls to hugging strangers, giving homeless people huge wads of cash and rescuing stray animals, “random acts of kindness” have proved a popular video genre on social media channels.</p>
<p>In media studies we call these videos “<a href="https://academic.oup.com/joc/article/68/2/380/4958960">eudaimonic media</a>” – from the ancient Greek word “eudaimonia”. This is often translated as meaning “happiness” but the philosopher Aristotle used it to refer to <a href="https://www.britannica.com/topic/eudaimonia">the highest human good</a> – to <a href="https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-eudaimonia/">living a life of virtue</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Aristotle's 'eudaimonic ethics' concerned living a life of moral excellence." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/474992/original/file-20220719-22-qsxqdz.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Aristotle’s ‘eudaimonic ethics’ concerned living a life of moral excellence.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In contrast to hedonistic media – content that’s all about personal gratification and pleasure – eudaimonic media is meant to make us reflect on life’s purpose, potential, virtue and meaning. </p>
<h2>Feel-good outweighs feel-bad</h2>
<p>For all the focus on social media’s capacity to promote “engagement” through sensationalism, polarisation and appealing to people’s worst emotions, the market for eudaimonic content remains far bigger.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/anger-is-all-the-rage-on-twitter-when-its-cold-outside-and-on-mondays-141589">Anger is all the rage on Twitter when it's cold outside (and on Mondays)</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>A survey of <a href="https://buffer.com/resources/facebook-marketing-2019/">more than 777 million Facebook posts</a> in 2019, for example, found “love” emojis accounted for about half of all video reactions in 2018 (compared with 4.5% “angry” emojis). </p>
<p>Facebook’s most watched video that year, with more than <a href="https://swell-social.com/the-most-successful-facebook-post-in-2018/">361 million views</a>, was of Jay Shetty, a Hindu monk turned life coach/influencer giving an inspirational talk to school students (scored with poignant piano music). </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Jay Shetty's homily to school students was the most viewed video on Facebook in 2018." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=340&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=340&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=340&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/475003/original/file-20220720-16-rebqz8.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=427&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Jay Shetty’s homily to school students was the most viewed video on Facebook in 2018.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Jay Shetty/Facebook</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/">CC BY</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All up Shetty reportedly <a href="https://www.tubefilter.com/2019/02/11/facebook-watch-vidcon-london-jay-shetty/">earned US$1 million</a> in Facebook advertising revenue in 2018 – something certainly to inspire Pawluck and his collaborators.</p>
<h2>Show me the eudaimonia!</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/15205436.2021.1912774">Studies</a> indicate that eudaimonic media can be a “moral motivator”, inspiring prosocial behaviour.</p>
<p>But there’s a clear ethical problem when content creators have high hedonistic motivations – <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-319-91521-0_18">fame and fortune</a> – to make “feel-good” videos. With that pressure, “acts of kindness” can become performative, even exploitative.</p>
<p>Part of any social media influencer’s strategy is <a href="https://scholarsbank.uoregon.edu/xmlui/handle/1794/26365">a form of performance</a>, of course. But with a “eudaimonic” content creator, it’s hard to reconcile virtuous action with contrived scenarios where the people being filmed are being used as a means to an end.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/giving-out-flowers-on-tiktok-is-this-a-random-act-of-kindness-or-just-benevolent-ageism-187064">Giving out flowers on TikTok: is this a 'random act of kindness' or just benevolent ageism?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>We’re all responsible</h2>
<p>It would be easy to focus on Pawluck and his fellow content creators, but this is part of the bigger systemic problem with social media: that it is often antisocial even when appearing, superficially, to be prosocial. </p>
<p>The bottom line with the entire social media business model is that appealing to, amplifying and manipulating emotions is a surefire way to increase engagement and monetise content.</p>
<p>This is where we all, as social media users, have the power to contribute to the higher good. We must be more discerning about the type of content we are encouraging people like Pawluck to make though our clicks and comments. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/what-our-negative-comments-and-consumer-gripes-on-social-media-reveal-about-us-175148">What our negative comments and consumer gripes on social media reveal about us</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Watching that video might have momentarily made us feel good, but did the content creator actually do good? Are they upfront about their financial motivations? Have they sought permission from their unwitting subjects?</p>
<p>As Maree noted after she unwittingly became the star of the latest commercially-motivated social media trend:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I feel like clickbait.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Consider the impact of your next hit of a feel-good video of a rescued dog or giving those less fortunate money or food. Is this a eudaimonic or money-making moment? </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-regulation-why-we-must-ensure-it-is-democratic-and-inclusive-179819">Social media regulation: why we must ensure it is democratic and inclusive</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/187074/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Renee Barnes does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>We all love random act of kindness. But before you ‘like’ or share that heartwarming video, ask yourself if it’s an authentic feel-good moment or an act of exploitation.Renee Barnes, Senior Lecturer, Journalism, University of the Sunshine CoastLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1836292022-05-24T20:05:03Z2022-05-24T20:05:03ZHow the ‘reality-distorting machinery’ of the federal election campaign delivered sub-par journalism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464967/original/file-20220524-26-yvmvxg.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=580%2C5%2C3389%2C1988&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Wes Mountain/The Conversation</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The nightly television news coverage of the 2022 federal election was among the most juvenile and uninformative in 50 years.</p>
<p>Given that about 61% of Australians get their <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/588441/australia-news-sources/">news from television</a> in an average week, this matters.</p>
<p>The pattern was set early on: unimaginative, slavish PR-stunt footage of the leaders, combined with young go-getters in the travelling media packs trying to make a name for themselves with gotcha questions.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/as-news-corp-goes-rogue-on-election-coverage-what-price-will-australian-democracy-pay-181599">As News Corp goes 'rogue' on election coverage, what price will Australian democracy pay?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>It is a pattern that has been developing for a long time, and for which editorial leadership in Australia’s main newsrooms is responsible – leadership of my own generation included.</p>
<p>More than 30 years ago, it became obvious to editorial executives that having their senior political correspondents travelling with the leaders was a waste of time and resources.</p>
<p>Instead, the senior correspondents were encouraged to base themselves in Canberra and to be selective about where and when they went on the road.</p>
<p>They attended campaign launches and major set-pieces such as leaders’ debates or National Press Club appearances, but otherwise they focused on analysing issues and trends as they emerged.</p>
<p>Relatively junior staff took their places “on the bus”.</p>
<p>The reason it became a waste of time and precious resources to keep the senior people on the bus was that the party apparatchiks and campaign managers imposed increasingly limited access to the leaders, and increasingly absurd secrecy about the travel schedule.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464912/original/file-20220524-43418-m7ogej.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The pattern was set early on, with some journalists fixated on asking gotcha questions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Rick Rycroft/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It got to the point where the itinerary for the day would be slipped under journalists’ hotel doors in the early hours of the morning.</p>
<p>In these ways, the parties became able to exert a high degree of control over the media coverage. It is very difficult to prepare questions to put to the leaders if you have no idea where you will be the next day, what the leaders will be doing, or what opportunity you will get to ask a question.</p>
<p>As a result, journalists and camera crews have become hostage to the party machines – news takers rather than news makers.</p>
<p>They find themselves trailing around factories, building sites, hospitals, playgrounds, shooting footage of the most banal but politically self-serving kind: helmets and hi-vis vests; Scott Morrison as a welder, pastry cook, hairdresser or whatever else he is dressed up as; Albanese having an earnest cup of tea with an elderly voter or bent over some unsuspecting child at a daycare centre.</p>
<p>Then comes the fleeting stand-up media conference, often outdoors against random background noise.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=382&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/464916/original/file-20220524-23-c2957e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=481&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Journalists travel around with the leaders to the photo op of the day, in which hi-vis vests feature prominently.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Con Chronis/AAP</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Ten metres away and robbed of any meaningful preparation, the reporters shout questions that may or may not have anything to do with what they have just seen or with any issue of the remotest relevance to voter concerns.</p>
<p>Was there a question about climate change, corruption or gender equality at any of those stand-ups? Fitting such questions into the scenario controlled by the party machines is next to impossible.</p>
<p>So the stage is set for the gotcha question.</p>
<p>They have their place, as the one to Albanese in the first week about the unemployment level showed. It revealed him as astonishingly ill-prepared, but as John Howard said that night: “So what?”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/view-from-the-hill-albanese-trips-morrison-claims-ignorance-of-huge-payout-in-tudge-affair-181070">View from The Hill: Albanese trips, Morrison claims ignorance of huge payout in Tudge affair</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>After that, Albanese was peppered with them, and seemed quite unable to muster anything like Adam Bandt’s classic response when confronted with something similar: “Google it, mate.”</p>
<p>But as Howard implied, it told us nothing about Albanese’s capabilities as a potential prime minister.</p>
<p>His confidence strong once he had won the prime ministership, Albanese asserted himself in the face of the media pack: “You will not get the call earlier if you yell. Day one. Let’s get that clear.”</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1528546342632853504"}"></div></p>
<p>This unedifying routine affects all news coverage, but television journalists suffer from it the most. The exigencies of television news bulletin production leave them little scope for persistent questioning and little time to prepare their scripts. It is all about grabs and pictures.</p>
<p>Newspaper journalists at least have the luxury of a little more time to prepare their print-edition stories, even if they have to file quickly for their online editions.</p>
<p>What can editorial executives do in the face of this?</p>
<p>For one thing, they do not have to run the tiresome, cliched footage of politicians doing stunts. Shoot it by all means, but there is no need to use it unless something newsworthy happens.</p>
<p>For another, they need to do a lot more to brief their junior staff on the bus about questions that might constructively inform the audience.</p>
<p>Take the unemployment figures. The outgoing prime minister and treasurer were understandably proud of the 3.9% unemployment figure that came out in the last week of the campaign.</p>
<p>But this statistic is in part an artefact of the participation rate. When people are so discouraged they stop looking for work, the unemployment rate looks better. So why not a question to the prime minister or treasurer about the participation rate? Or about under-employment?</p>
<p>Relatively inexperienced reporters being herded and hustled on the ground need not only guidance but also support in the form of necessary background information.</p>
<p>More strategically, it is time to call a halt to arrangements that co-opt the media into acting as a publicity arm for the two main parties.</p>
<p>The new reality is that there are three main forces in Australian politics: Labor, the Liberal-National Coalition and the Greens/Independents. Each attracted roughly one-third of the primary vote at the 2022 election.</p>
<p>This means the media will be paying more attention to the third force than they traditionally have, and so gives the media more leverage in dealing with the two main parties, which no longer have the power of a duopoly.</p>
<p>The media should insist on receiving travel schedules in reasonable time, on having media conferences held in settings where the exchange can be conducted civilly, and where there is time for the leaders to be subjected to questions of substance, including follow-up questions.</p>
<p>As the COVID-19 media conferences showed, these can elicit useful information because journalists are, on the whole, not piranhas but intelligent people keen to do right by the public.</p>
<p>It is not they, as individuals, who are to blame for the appalling television coverage we have seen over the past six weeks but the whole reality-distorting machinery in which they are caught up.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183629/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The major parties have come to control the way the media can cover election campaigns – leading to dress-up stunts and gotcha questions instead of meaningful journalism.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1830772022-05-16T18:30:04Z2022-05-16T18:30:04ZHow media reports of ‘clashes’ mislead Americans about Israeli-Palestinian violence<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463332/original/file-20220516-15-bbvezx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C22%2C3715%2C2454&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">When does a 'clash' become an 'assault'?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/PicturesoftheWeek-Global-PhotoGallery/bc862b042976498580767f551fd3e35f/photo?Query=Shireen%20Abu%20Akleh%20funeral%20police&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=20&currentItemNo=8">AP Photo/Maya Levin</a></span></figcaption></figure><p><a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/5/13/why-is-israel-afraid-of-the-palestinian-flag">Israeli police attacked</a> mourners carrying the coffin of slain Palestinian-American journalist Shireen Abu Akleh on May 13, 2022, <a href="https://apnews.com/article/shireen-abu-akleh-journalist-funeral-west-bank-bb71e2ec64dd034066bc6df4a9aa2fb3">beating pallbearers with batons and kicking them</a> when they fell to the ground.</p>
<p>Yet those who skimmed the headlines of initial reports from several U.S. media outlets may have been left with a different impression of what happened. </p>
<p>“Israeli Police Clash with Mourners at Funeral Procession,” read the <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/morning-joe/watch/israeli-police-clash-with-mourners-a-funeral-procession-for-journalist-139944517790">headline of MSNBC’s online report</a>. The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/israeli-forces-palestinians-clash-in-west-bank-before-funeral-of-journalist-11652471399">had a similar</a> headline on its story: “Israeli Forces, Palestinians Clash in West Bank before Funeral of Journalist.”</p>
<p>Fox News <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/world/israeli-police-clash-al-jazeera-journalist-shireen-abu-akleh-mourners">began the text of its article</a> with “Clashes erupted Friday in Jerusalem as mourners attended the burial of veteran American Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh who was shot dead Friday when covering a raid in the West Bank city of Jenin.”</p>
<p>There is no mention in the headlines of these articles about who instigated the violence, nor any hint of the power imbalance between a heavily armed Israeli police force and what appeared to be unarmed Palestinian civilians.</p>
<p>Such language and omissions are common in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/when-it-comes-to-media-reporting-on-israel-palestine-there-is-nowhere-to-hide-160992">reporting of violence conducted by Israel’s police or military</a>. Similar headlines followed an incident in April in which <a href="https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-jerusalem-aqsa-mosque-storm-attack-worshipper">Israeli police attacked worshippers</a> at Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque during the Muslim holy month of Ramadan. Then, too, police attacks on worshippers – in which as many as 152 Palestinians were injured by rubber bullets and batons – were <a href="https://www.npr.org/2022/04/17/1093233899/jerusalem-violence-al-aqsa-mosque">widely</a> <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/israeli-police-palestinians-clash-jerusalem-holy-site-2022-04-15/">described</a> as “clashes.”</p>
<p>And headlines matter – many Americans <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/03/19/americans-read-headlines-and-not-much-else/">do not read past them</a> when consuming news or <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-intersect/wp/2016/06/16/six-in-10-of-you-will-share-this-link-without-reading-it-according-to-a-new-and-depressing-study/">sharing articles online</a>.</p>
<h2>Neutral terms aren’t always neutral</h2>
<p>The use of a word like “clashes” might seem to make sense in a topic as contentious as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which violent acts are perpetrated by both sides.</p>
<p>But as a <a href="https://menas.arizona.edu/people/maha-nassar">scholar of Palestinian history</a> and an <a href="https://www.972mag.com/us-media-palestinians/">analyst of U.S. media coverage of this topic</a>, I believe using neutral terms such as “clashes” to describe Israeli police and military attacks on Palestinian civilians is misleading. It overlooks instances in which Israeli forces instigate violence against Palestinians who pose no threat to them. It also often gives more weight to official Israeli narratives than to Palestinian ones.</p>
<p>U.S. media have <a href="http://cup.columbia.edu/book/pens-and-swords/9780231133487">long been accused</a> of <a href="https://doi.org/10.1525/jps.2001.30.2.61">misleading their audience</a> when it comes to violence committed against Palestinians. A 2021 <a href="https://web.mit.edu/hjackson/www/The_NYT_Distorts_the_Palestinian_Struggle.pdf">study from MIT of 50 years of New York Times coverage</a> of the conflict found “a disproportionate use of the passive voice to refer to negative or violent action perpetrated towards Palestinians.” </p>
<p>Using the passive voice – for example, reporting that “Palestinians were killed in clashes” rather than “Israeli forces killed Palestinians” – is language that helps shield Israel from scrutiny. It also obscures the reason so many Palestinians would be angry at Israel. </p>
<p>It’s not just The New York Times. A <a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/01/12/israel-palestine-conflict-news-headlines/">2019 analysis by data researchers in Canada of more than 100,000 headlines</a> from 50 years of U.S. coverage across five newspapers <a href="https://vridar.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/416LABS_50_Years_of_Occupation.pdf">concluded that</a> “the U.S. mainstream media’s coverage of the conflict favors Israel in terms of both the sheer quantity of stories covered, and by providing more opportunities to the Israelis to amplify their point of view.”</p>
<p>That 2019 study also found that words associated with violence, including “clash” and “clashes,” were more likely to be used in stories about Palestinians than Israelis.</p>
<h2>Competing narratives</h2>
<p>One problem with using “clash” is that it obscures incidents in which Israeli police and security forces attack Palestinians who pose no threat to them. </p>
<p>Amnesty International, a human rights advocacy group, <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2022/05/israel-opt-increase-in-unlawful-killings-and-other-crimes-highlights-urgent-need-to-end-israels-apartheid-against-palestinians/">described the recent incident at the Al-Aqsa Mosque</a> as one in which Israeli police “brutally attacked worshippers in and around the mosque and used violence that amounts to torture and other ill-treatment to break up gatherings.”</p>
<p>The word “clashes” does not convey this reality.</p>
<p>Using “clashes” also gives more credibility to the Israeli government version of the story than the Palestinian one. Israeli officials often accuse Palestinians of instigating violence, claiming that soldiers and police had to use lethal force to stave off Palestinian attacks. And that’s how these events are usually reported.</p>
<p>But Israeli human rights group B'Tselem’s database on Israeli and Palestinian fatalities <a href="https://statistics.btselem.org/en/all-fatalities/by-date-of-incident?section=participation&tab=overview">shows that</a> most of the roughly 10,000 Palestinians killed by Israel since 2000 did not “participate in hostilities” at the time they were killed.</p>
<p>We saw this attempt to shift the blame to Palestinians for Israeli violence in the killing of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh. According to <a href="https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-al-jazeera-journalist-shireen-abu-akleh-shot-dead-jenin">her colleagues at the scene of her death</a>, an Israeli military sniper <a href="https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/shireen-abu-akleh-killing-al-jazeera-journalist-eyewitness-account?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1652294662">deliberately shot and killed the veteran journalist</a> with a live bullet to her right temple, even though she was wearing a “PRESS” flak jacket and helmet. One or more snipers also shot at Abu Akleh’s colleagues as they tried to rescue her, <a href="https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/israel-palestine-al-jazeera-journalist-shireen-abu-akleh-shot-dead-jenin">according to eyewitness accounts</a>. </p>
<p>At first, Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/05/11/israel-jazeera-journalist-jenin/">said</a> that “armed Palestinians shot in an inaccurate, indiscriminate and uncontrolled manner” at the time of her killing – implying that Palestinians could have shot Abu Akleh. Then, as evidence mounted <a href="https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20220512-btselem-israel-narrative-about-killing-shireen-abu-akleh-untrue/">disproving this account</a>, Israeli officials changed course, <a href="https://www.jta.org/2022/05/11/israel/benny-gantz-al-jazeera-journalist-may-have-been-killed-by-israeli-or-palestinian-fire">saying that</a> the source of the gunfire “cannot yet be determined.”</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="A women walks past a mural depicting slain journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and a helmet with 'PRESS' on it." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/463376/original/file-20220516-14-m92a0k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A mural of slain Al Jazeera journalist Shireen Abu Akleh.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/PalestiniansIsraelJournalistKilled/80b0af70f3b34da798c415d95ce8c952/photo?Query=Shireen%20Abu%20Akleh&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=140&currentItemNo=14">AP Photo/Adel Hana</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The New York Times initially <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/11/world/middleeast/al-jazeera-journalist-killed-west-bank.html?searchResultPosition=7">reported that</a> Abu Akleh “was shot as clashes between the Israeli military and Palestinian gunmen took place in the city.” Further down in the same story, we read that Palestinian journalist Ali Samudi, who was wounded in the same attack, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/11/world/middleeast/al-jazeera-journalist-killed-west-bank.html?searchResultPosition=7">said</a>, “There were no armed Palestinians or resistance or even civilians in the area.” Yet this perspective is missing from the headline and opening paragraphs of the story. </p>
<p>A few days later, an <a href="https://www.bellingcat.com/news/mena/2022/05/14/unravelling-the-killing-of-shireen-abu-akleh/">analysis of available video footage</a> by investigative journalism outlet Bellingcat concluded that the evidence “appears to support” eyewitnesses who said no militant activity was taking place and that the gunfire came from Israeli military snipers.</p>
<p>The New York Times has not updated or corrected its original story to reflect this new evidence.</p>
<p>It provides an example of why the use of “clash” has been widely <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/28/jerusalem-al-aqsa-media-coverage-israeli-violence-palestinians/">criticized by Palestinian and Arab journalists</a>. Indeed, the Arab and Middle Eastern Journalist Association in 2021 <a href="https://static1.squarespace.com/static/56f442fc5f43a6ecc531a9f5/t/60a7f4b94dcb02030b448fc2/1621619899348/Guidelines+for+Palestine+%3A+Israel+Coverage+-+AMEJA.pdf">issued guidance for journalists</a>, urging that they “avoid the word ‘clashes’ in favor of a more precise description.” </p>
<h2>An incomplete picture</h2>
<p>There is another problem with “clashes.” Limiting media attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict only when “clashes erupt” gives Western readers and viewers an incomplete picture. It ignores what B’Tselem describes as the “<a href="https://www.btselem.org/routine_founded_on_violence">daily routine of overt or implicit state violence</a>” that Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories face.</p>
<p>Without understanding the daily violence that Palestinians experience – as documented by groups such as <a href="https://www.hrw.org/report/2021/04/27/threshold-crossed/israeli-authorities-and-crimes-apartheid-and-persecution">Human Rights Watch</a> and <a href="https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/campaigns/2022/02/israels-system-of-apartheid/">Amnesty International</a> – it is harder for news consumers to fully comprehend why “clashes” take place in the first place.</p>
<p>But the way people get their news is changing, and with it so are Americans’ views on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. This is especially true among younger Americans, who are <a href="https://www.digitalnewsreport.org/survey/2019/how-younger-generations-consume-news-differently/">less likely</a> to receive their news from mainstream outlets. </p>
<p>Recent polls show that younger Americans generally <a href="https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/04/24/a-new-perspective-on-americans-views-of-israelis-and-palestinians/">sympathize with Palestinians</a> more than older Americans. That shift holds among <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2979/israelstudies.22.3.08#metadata_info_tab_contents">younger Jewish Americans</a> and <a href="https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/evangelical-youth-losing-love-for-israel-by-35-percent-study-shows-671178">younger evangelicals</a>, two communities that have traditionally expressed strong pro-Israel sentiments.</p>
<p>U.S. journalists themselves are also working to change how outlets cover Israeli violence. Last year several of them – including reporters from The Boston Globe, the Los Angeles Times, The Washington Post and ABC News – issued an <a href="https://medialetterpalestine.medium.com/an-open-letter-on-u-s-media-coverage-of-palestine-d51cad42022d">open letter</a> calling on fellow journalists “to tell the full, contextualized truth without fear or favor, to recognize that obfuscating Israel’s oppression of Palestinians fails this industry’s own objectivity standards.” So far, over 500 journalists have signed on.</p>
<p>Accurate language in the reporting of Israeli-Palestinian violence is not only a concern for journalists’ credibility – it would also provide U.S. news consumers with a deeper understanding of the conditions on the ground and the deadly consequences.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/183077/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maha Nassar is a 2022 Palestinian Non-Resident Fellow at the Foundation for Middle East Peace.</span></em></p>In trying to present violent events in ‘neutral’ language, media reports may be ignoring power imbalances when it comes to Israeli police or military violence against Palestinian civilians.Maha Nassar, Associate Professor in the School of Middle Eastern and North African Studies, University of ArizonaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1769442022-02-24T15:12:42Z2022-02-24T15:12:42ZJournalism has changed. Education must reflect the reality<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/446241/original/file-20220214-97814-ojdbvg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=5%2C52%2C528%2C325&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Traditional media, particularly print, are in decline as audiences move online.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Patrick Meinhardt / AFP via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>For more than a century, journalism education prepared young people for the role of full-time professionals employed by sizeable news organisations. But the advertising-based business model that sustained journalism is collapsing because of new technology, and jobs of the old kind are becoming scarce. The educational model, too, must change to accommodate the new realities. </p>
<p>Traditional media – particularly print – are in decline as audiences move online and revenue streams follow them to platform giants like Google and Facebook. As a result, titles have had to close and journalists have been retrenched. Sub-Saharan Africa, too, is affected by these global trends, as reflected in recent reports <a href="https://journalism.co.za/resources/state-of-the-newsroom/">on South Africa</a>, <a href="https://internews.org/wp-content/uploads/legacy/2021-03/KMAReport_Final_20210325.pdf">Kenya</a> and <a href="https://medialandscapes.org/country/nigeria">Nigeria</a>.</p>
<p>The demand for journalism graduates is shrinking, while non-professionals play an increasing role in supplying society with information. As I argue in a <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/disrupted-media-disrupted-academy-rethinking-african-j-schools/">new paper</a>, journalism schools need to reorientate their courses to new kinds of students and adjust the curriculum for the new post-professional world of journalism. If they do not, they risk becoming irrelevant – if they do, a host of new opportunities present themselves.</p>
<h2>Teaching for a professional role</h2>
<p>Historically, journalism teaching emerged just over a century ago as journalists began to claim the status of professionals. The first journalism school in the US was founded in <a href="https://journalism.missouri.edu/the-j-school/the-j-school-legacy/">1908 at the University of Missouri</a>. Since then, students have enrolled in journalism courses expecting to obtain the necessary skills and knowledge to work as full-time professionals in a newsroom. </p>
<p>In Africa, too, journalism and communication schools have become common.</p>
<p>Researcher Alan Finlay writes in the introduction of <a href="https://journalism.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/Mapping-Africa-Training-Centres-V6_09122020.pdf">a recent mapping study</a>: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Journalism education and training in sub-Saharan Africa is flourishing.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The study counted a total of 127 education providers in 19 countries, though he acknowledges that the exercise was limited. </p>
<p>But today’s journalism students are less likely to find full-time jobs as professional journalists. In the Global North, journalism has become “post-industrial, entrepreneurial and atypical”, as Dutch scholar <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mark_Deuze2/publication/318780756_What_journalism_becomes/links/5bf8086ea6fdcc53881544cf/What-journalism-becomes.pdf">Mark Deuze</a> puts it. </p>
<p>The industrial age of journalistic media, with news produced by full-time professionals, looks like it is ending. Journalists are more likely to have to behave like entrepreneurs in the <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/0950017018785616">gig economy</a>, moving from one short-term contract to the next. It is a precarious existence.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">False story about decuplets was a low point for journalism: how to fix the damage</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In Africa, journalism has been precarious for longer and <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/africa/tanzania-lifts-ban-four-newspapers-2022-02-10/">for other reasons</a>. Political pressures and fragile media economies mean that working for independent media is often freelance, with low and uncertain pay.</p>
<p>However, new opportunities emerge if journalism is thought of less as a profession, but rather as a practice. <a href="https://academiccommons.columbia.edu/doi/10.7916/D8N01JS7">A report from the Tow Centre</a> says </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the journalism industry is dead but … journalism exists in many places.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Journalism, in the sense of finding, sifting and sharing important information, remains of crucial importance. But it is no longer under the sole control of professional journalists. News organisations remain important, but have to accept they are no longer information monopolies. Reliable information remains essential for societies to work, but it is produced by a range of people, not all of them in traditional newsrooms. </p>
<p>Others contribute kinds of journalism to the information ecosystem: a South African maths teacher, Sugan Naidoo, for instance, has made it his business to publish daily summaries of COVID-19 data <a href="https://twitter.com/sugan2503">on Twitter</a>. There is no indication he sees himself as a journalist, but his posts are more journalistic than some stories – such as that about <a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">South Africa’s fictional decuplets</a> last year – and some other material published by mainstream media.</p>
<p>The quality of the information published matters a great deal – one of the challenges of the social media world is the amount of misinformation available. The difficulty of telling rubbish from worthwhile information has bred distrust of journalism. And that is where the crisis offers journalism schools in Africa – and arguably elsewhere – an opportunity.</p>
<h2>Reimagining journalism training</h2>
<p>Young people wanting to become full-time journalists are no longer the only people who want and need to learn journalistic skills. Others include people in community media, media entrepreneurs and “accidental journalists” – people who don’t see themselves as journalists but who contribute worthwhile information. At the same time, there is a substantial need for working journalists to update their skill sets for a rapidly changing world.</p>
<p>As the shrinking job market in many countries discourages young people from entering the field, there are also practical reasons for identifying new types of potential students. New groups of students bring fee income from new directions into cash-strapped universities.</p>
<p>Journalism schools also need to think about the curriculum. There is a need for old-school skills like verification and the ability to work out what is publicly important or “newsworthy”. There is a need for new technical skills, from <a href="https://datajournalism.com/read/handbook/one/introduction/what-is-data-journalism">data journalism</a> to podcasting and artificial intelligence. </p>
<p>Importantly, an expanded approach to journalism education is not just about technical skills, it must include critical thinking and self-awareness, while centring on established values of independence and public service. Journalism may emerge in all kinds of contexts, but unless it contributes value to public discussion it is simply noise. That is what sets it apart from other forms of communication.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/decolonising-peace-journalism-and-putting-it-to-work-in-east-africa-139219">Decolonising peace journalism -- and putting it to work in East Africa</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Overall, journalism schools have obligations that go beyond producing the next generation of young journalists. They can and should consider much more broadly what they can do to sustain and improve the health of the information systems around them. In African countries, the responsibility is particularly acute as there may be few other institutions able to play such a role. Research and an involvement in public discussion of media issues are just some of the ways they can contribute, and many already do so.</p>
<p>New opportunities and challenges will continue to emerge, and the task of reinvention will be ongoing. To remain relevant, journalism schools need to combine flexibility with a firm sense of society’s central and continuing need for reliable information.</p>
<p><em>This article is based on <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/disrupted-media-disrupted-academy-rethinking-african-j-schools/">a paper</a> written as a fellow of the <a href="https://shorensteincenter.org/">Shorenstein Centre</a> for Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Governance.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176944/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The research for this paper was supported through a fellowship from the Shorenstein Center for Media, Politics and Public Policy at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Governance._</span></em></p>Today’s journalism students are less likely to find full-time jobs as professional journalists. The craft has become ‘post-industrial’, entrepreneurial and atypical.Franz Krüger, Adjunct Professor of Journalism and Director of the Wits Radio Academy, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1730572021-12-05T16:49:21Z2021-12-05T16:49:21ZHow dual loyalties created an ethics problem for Chris Cuomo and CNN<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435698/original/file-20211205-15-1cmfn4t.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C0%2C2986%2C2097&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, left, and his brother, former CNN anchor, Chris Cuomo.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/CuomoSexualHarassment/cb27280f4784432abd15d6afc3a44b22/photo?Query=Chris%20Cuomo&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=280&currentItemNo=3">(Mike Groll/Office of Governor of Andrew M. Cuomo via AP, left, and Evan Agostini/Invision/AP</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>CNN anchor Chris Cuomo <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/03/so-now-chris-cuomo-cant-cover-brother-andrew-cuomo-for-cnn">conceded</a> in March, 2021 that he could not, ethically, cover the sexual harassment allegations against his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo. The family ties were simply too strong for him to do so independently. </p>
<p>But afterwards, Chris provided behind-the-scenes counsel to his brother and his brother’s team. By August, 2021, when Andrew <a href="https://ballotpedia.org/Resignation_of_Andrew_Cuomo,_2021">resigned</a> in the wake of the scandal, there were <a href="https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/biden-calls-andrew-cuomo-resign-he-s-not-only-cuomo-n1275856">calls</a> for Chris to step down from his job as well because the New York attorney general’s initial report <a href="https://twitter.com/ShaneGoldmacher/status/1422593799419801603">revealed</a> that he had helped draft a statement for his brother in February. As the adage has it, no one can serve two masters. The CNN anchor who should have been serving the public was secretly putting family loyalty first by helping his brother navigate a political and public relations disaster.</p>
<p>And now CNN has <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/04/business/media/chris-cuomo-fired-cnn.html">fired</a> Cuomo. The firing happened on Dec. 4, less than a week after the attorney general’s office <a href="https://ag.ny.gov/press-release/2021/additional-transcripts-exhibits-and-videos-independent-investigation-sexual">released</a> pages of transcripts, exhibits and videos from its investigation into sexual harassment allegations against Andrew Cuomo. The documents detailed the extensive help Chris Cuomo had been providing to his brother for months. </p>
<p>Viewers of CNN would have known about the cozy familial relationship between the two. In 2020, when Andrew Cuomo was still governor of New York, Chris teamed up with his brother to banter on the cable network about how the state was handling the pandemic. The segments were <a href="https://thehill.com/opinion/criminal-justice/567288-a-look-back-at-the-rise-and-spectacular-fall-of-the-cuomo-brothers">wildly popular</a>. </p>
<p>Although they <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2020/05/cnns-cuomo-no-no/612103/">raised eyebrows</a> in media ethics circles because Chris Cuomo appeared to be <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/05/business/media/brothers-cuomo-andrew-chris.html">violating</a> fundamental norms of journalistic independence. CNN <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/dec/01/chris-cuomo-cnn-routine-brother-undermined-network">justified</a> its exception to a conflict of interest rule imposed since 2013 prohibiting the anchor from covering his brother, stating, “Chris speaking with his brother about the challenges of what millions of American families were struggling with was of significant human interest.” </p>
<p>And, incidentally, the banter was <a href="https://www.latimes.com/entertainment-arts/business/story/2021-08-03/chris-cuomo-hosts-his-cnn-show-but-is-silent-on-sex-harassment-charges-against-his-brother">great for ratings</a>. But the sexual harassment scandal that erupted in late 2020 put an end to all that.</p>
<p>But it did not end the behind-the-scenes conflict. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Chris Cuomo on a city sidewalk, talking into a microphone for a news report." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=385&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435699/original/file-20211205-15-u24iuw.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=483&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Chris Cuomo during on air report in front of the Time Warner Building, where police removed an explosive device Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2018, in New York.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/CuomoSexualHarassment/d607956508e848458c5685d8dcb95e89/photo?Query=CNN%20Chris%20Cuomo&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=92&currentItemNo=0">AP Photo/Kevin Hagen</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Public interest above self-interest</h2>
<p>As Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel – former journalists and now ethics scholars and media watchdogs – have <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/">written</a>, “[Journalists] must strive to put the public interest – and the truth – above their own self-interest or assumptions.”</p>
<p>Journalists’ fundamental role in democracy is to <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp">hold those in power, especially those in government, accountable</a>. But if they have close relationships with those in power, their independence, or at least the perception of it, can be compromised. <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/">Independence coupled with accountability and transparency underpin the public’s trust</a> in journalists. </p>
<p>But goodwill towards Chris Cuomo, who the Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/08/13/cuomo-cnn-return/">reported</a> was “known for his intense loyalty to the network, its employees and their families,” along with the <a href="https://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/us/cnn-s-cuomo-dilemma-a-star-anchor-with-a-brother-in-trouble-1.4640489">unwavering support</a> of CNN President Jeff Zucker, helped Cuomo keep his job. </p>
<p>He stayed in it until the Nov. 29 document dump disclosed just how closely the CNN anchor had helped his brother Andrew’s team frame and mount a defense to the accusations. Among the offers Chris made: he would <a href="https://www.newsweek.com/chris-cuomo-offered-his-sources-learn-if-more-women-would-accuse-brother-harassment-1654108">work his own journalistic sources</a> to investigate the credibility of the women who alleged harassment or assault.</p>
<p>At that point, CNN <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/30/business/media/chris-cuomo-suspended-cnn.html">suspended</a> Cuomo “indefinitely.”</p>
<p>“When Chris admitted to us that he had offered advice to his brother’s staff, he broke our rules and we acknowledged that publicly,” CNN said in a <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/media/583693-cnn-suspends-chris-cuomo-indefinitely">statement</a>. “But we also appreciated the unique position he was in and understood his need to put family first and job second.”</p>
<p>Cuomo’s firing followed four days later.</p>
<h2>‘Accountable and transparent’</h2>
<p>Was it ethical for the anchor to continue to advise his brother while representing to his viewers that he was keeping his relationship at arm’s length? Should he even have participated in what a Donald Trump campaign spokesman called “<a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/entertainment/tv/2021/02/19/cnns-chris-cuomo-can-no-longer-interview-brother-gov-andrew-cuomo/4504315001/">the Cuomo Brothers Comedy Hour</a>” at the beginning of the pandemic?</p>
<p>Journalists’ associations have developed ethical codes and guidelines that address this situation. </p>
<p>One of the <a href="https://www.spj.org/spjhistory.asp">oldest</a> and best known is the <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp">Code of Ethics</a> of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ). <a href="https://www.npr.org/ethics">News organizations</a> also have their own ethics rules and <a href="https://cm.usatoday.com/ethical-conduct/">post them</a> online so that the public can read them. Television networks frequently assign ethics enforcement to their “<a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20140111003232/http://www.museum.tv/eotv/standardsand.htm">Standards and Practices</a>” departments. </p>
<p>These codes set out the ethical standards for a news operation.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The Society of Professional Journalists' Code of Ethics, printed on one page." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=776&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435701/original/file-20211205-15-ab3741.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=975&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics, which says ‘An ethical journalist acts with integrity.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.spj.org/pdf/spj-code-of-ethics.pdf">Society of Professional Journalists</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But the word “code” is a misnomer. Although news organizations are free to enforce their provisions on their own staff, they are not intended to create <a href="https://cpj.org/2021/08/algeria-revokes-accreditation-of-saudi-channel-al-arabiya-over-allegedly-spreading-misinformation/">legal obligations</a> to anyone else, as with licensed professions such as <a href="https://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/administrative/professional_responsibility/2011-12_disc_agency_directory.pdf">law</a> and <a href="https://www.fsmb.org/contact-a-state-medical-board">medicine</a>. The SPJ Code is explicit about this, emphasizing that its code is “not, nor can it be under the First Amendment, legally enforceable.” </p>
<p>It does, however, emphasize that conflicts of interest must be avoided, or at the very least, disclosed, to maintain independence and transparency. </p>
<p>CNN has acknowledged that Chris Cuomo “broke our rules.” But the rules aren’t posted on CNN’s <a href="https://www.cnn.com/">website</a>. In fact, CNN has fought to keep them <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/05/07/cnn-fights-to-keep-internal-editorial-guidelines-under-wraps-why/">secret</a>. </p>
<p>In August, the Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2021/08/13/cuomo-cnn-return/">quoted</a> from a leaked copy of the network’s “News Standards & Practices Policy Guide,” reporting that “the document mandates that ‘CNN employees should avoid any real obligation or appearance of any obligation to any interest that he/she may be covering or reporting on,’ and ‘should avoid conflicts between personal interests and the interest of the company or even the appearance of such conflicts.’” </p>
<p>That sounds about right, but did CNN enforce those rules with Chris Cuomo? How could the anchor avoid conflicts of interest while pitching softball questions to his brother during the pandemic, much less by providing behind-the-scenes advice on how to deal with the sexual harassment scandal? </p>
<p>Many <a href="https://apnews.com/article/business-arts-and-entertainment-new-york-andrew-cuomo-chris-cuomo-ec26694560241c5bc8c1f31a362bb29d">media commentators</a> say that he couldn’t, and now, CNN seems to agree.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A middle-aged woman in white shirt, black sweater and with light brown hair." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/435702/original/file-20211205-19-18m421a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Media columnist Margaret Sullivan said of Cuomo, ‘You don’t abuse your position in journalism…for personal or familial gain.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/margaret-sullivan-media-columnist-the-washington-post-via-news-photo/1206570662?adppopup=true">Eric Hanson for The Washington Post via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Fool me once</h2>
<p>Was it unrealistic to expect the Cuomo brothers not to confer in times of crisis? Some news consumers think so, as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/30/business/media/chris-cuomo-suspended-cnn.html">reader comments</a> on a Nov. 30 New York Times story contended: “One of the biggest draws to CNN is Chris Cuomo & his personalized brotherly banter & friendship with Don Lemon. He reflects what’s right in America. Family & Loyalty.”</p>
<p>Those readers are right that it is a question of loyalty. But they are answering the question differently than many journalists would. </p>
<p>Kovach and Rosenstiel have <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/">written</a> that journalists’ “first loyalty is to citizens,” and in their book <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/671513/the-elements-of-journalism-revised-and-updated-4th-edition-by-bill-kovach-and-tom-rosenstiel/">The Elements of Journalism</a> call it an “implied covenant” with the audience. </p>
<p>As columnist Margaret Sullivan <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/chris-cuomo-journalism-ethics-sullivan/2021/12/01/eddae130-52ad-11ec-9267-17ae3bde2f26_story.html">argued</a> in the Washington Post, “You don’t abuse your position in journalism — whether at a weekly newspaper or a major network — for personal or familial gain.” </p>
<p>Conflicts of interest violate that covenant and undermine public confidence in media independence. Some conflicts of interest are such a problem that no amount of disclosure or disclaimers can cure them. CNN has apparently <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2021/12/04/media/cnn-fires-chris-cuomo/index.html">concluded</a> that Chris Cuomo’s is one of them.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/173057/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Jane E Kirtley serves on the board of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) Foundation, and was a member of the SPJ National Ethics Committee for several years. She reviewed Minnesota Public Radio's News Ethics Guidelines <a href="https://www.mprnews.org/ethics">https://www.mprnews.org/ethics</a> prior to adoption, and has written book chapters and articles on media ethics for a variety of publications. She is co-author of a textbook, Media Ethics Today: Issues, Analysis, Solutions (Cognella 2016).</span></em></p>A journalist’s role is to serve the public interest. But CNN anchor Chris Cuomo, by helping his brother, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo during a scandal, put personal interests above the public’s.Jane E. Kirtley, Silha Professor of Media Ethics and Law, University of MinnesotaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1711222021-11-04T14:31:33Z2021-11-04T14:31:33ZWhy the handling of a false South African news report about 10 babies has set off alarm bells<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/430195/original/file-20211104-19-14hcg0o.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Iqbal Survé, executive chairman of the Independent newspaper group.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Dirco/Flickr</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>South African newspaper proprietor Dr <a href="https://www.independentmedia.co.za/our-people/dr-iqbal-surve/">Iqbal Survé</a> has long pushed the boundaries of credibility, but recently he crossed the line into full fantasy. Should South Africans pay any attention to Survé? And what is to be done with a rogue publisher?</p>
<p>These are the questions South Africans – particularly journalists – are asking after the owner of Sekunjalo Independent Newspaper’s <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hzT5B0RI5s">recent media briefing</a>.</p>
<p>Survé acquired Independent Newspapers, one of the country’s biggest and most respected newspaper groups, <a href="https://mg.co.za/article/2013-08-21-sekunjalo-finalises-inmsa-purchase/">eight years ago</a>. But under his leadership, the titles have been reduced <a href="https://techcentral.co.za/south-africas-newspaper-industry-is-on-its-last-legs-2/173071/">to shadows of themselves</a>. </p>
<p>Survé called the briefing to reveal the outcome of investigations into the story his newspapers ran in June claiming that a Tshwane women had <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/pretoria-news/news/exclusive-gauteng-woman-gives-birth-to-10-children-breaks-guinness-world-record-5ba8c9e2-5cc6-49b3-8cc9-1e179fd535cd">given birth to decuplets</a>. He had promised his briefing would be “explosive” and it would implicate a number of senior people.</p>
<p>The story, written by Pretoria News editor Piet Rampedi, went viral around the world with the claim that the woman had broken all medical records by giving birth to 10 babies. The report fell apart when the newspaper could provide no evidence to back up the claim and it turned out that no-one –- not even Rampedi, or the babies’ father -– had seen them. </p>
<p>All the hospitals in the area <a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">denied knowledge of the births</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/false-story-about-decuplets-was-a-low-point-for-journalism-how-to-fix-the-damage-163814">False story about decuplets was a low point for journalism: how to fix the damage</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Rampedi <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/gauteng/independent-media-demands-health-department-come-clean-about-tembisa-decuplets-stands-by-piet-rampedi-c3dbed32-a1ae-40cf-8168-0cd9a063ec9c">stood his ground</a>, though, and Survé backed him, though he instituted a total of four different investigations: by an independent advocate, his <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-10-29-revealed-independent-medias-internal-report-on-piet-rampedis-decuplets-story-found-it-was-a-hoax-and-demanded-an-apology/">internal ombudsman</a>, his editorial team and his investigative team.</p>
<p>At the briefing, it became clear why he needed multiple investigations: it was to allow him to treat the four reports like a smorgasbord from which he could pick and choose. He ignored <a href="https://www.news24.com/news24/southafrica/news/fact-check-what-really-happened-to-the-tembisa-10-why-independent-medias-claims-just-dont-hold-up-20211028">Advocate Michael Donan’s independent investigation</a> which said that the report was irresponsible and Rampedi should face disciplinary action. </p>
<p>He also ignored his own ombudsmans’ report, which called the story <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2021-10-29-revealed-independent-medias-internal-report-on-piet-rampedis-decuplets-story-found-it-was-a-hoax-and-demanded-an-apology/">a “hoax”</a>.</p>
<p>Instead he went on a rambling account in which he said two of the babies had died and the others had been “trafficked” in a conspiracy involving doctors, nurses, hospitals and social workers. He produced no evidence, but said the proof would emerge in a 10-part documentary series his team were producing over the coming weeks. </p>
<p>At the centre of the conspiracy was an unnamed “Nigerian doctor” who could no longer be found.</p>
<p>If this was not the owner of what was once the country’s largest newspaper group, nobody would pay any attention to such delusion. But all of his newspaper titles echoed his account, at least <a href="https://www.enca.com/news/tembisa-10-independent-media-says-sithole-asked-give-babies-adoption">one television channel</a> carried his media briefing live and it trended on social media. Anyone who pointed out that his claims had no credibility was mocked as racist or uncaring of trafficking victims.</p>
<p>Why does any of this matter?</p>
<p>As a media practitioner and commentator for over four decades, I am of the view that Survé is systematically destroying what used to be a serious, credible set of newspapers. </p>
<h2>The destruction of a media house</h2>
<p>There are 16 titles in the Independent Group. All have seen an <a href="https://techcentral.co.za/south-africas-newspaper-industry-is-on-its-last-legs-2/173071/">almost total collapse</a> of their circulation since Survé bought out the group in 2013. </p>
<p>Most newspapers across the world have lost readers, but few have shrunk as dramatically as each of his titles: the Pretoria News only sells under 1,900 copies a day, down from 30,000; the Cape Argus is under 8,000 from a peak of nearly 80,000; the Cape Times under 9,000 from over 50,000; the Daily News 7,600; and the flagship The Star is below 15,000 when it was 220,000.</p>
<p>What used to be serious metropolitan voices are now at the scale of school news sheets.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/journalism-makes-blunders-but-still-feeds-democracy-an-insiders-view-146364">Journalism makes blunders but still feeds democracy: an insider's view</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This is tragic enough, but it is clear that Survé is also undermining the credibility of journalists and news outlets in general at a time when the industry is already in deep financial pain, and struggling to rebuild its standing. </p>
<p>He is fuelling a popular cynicism towards the media, creating a situation – as we have seen elsewhere – ripe for malicious malinformation and dangerous populism.</p>
<p>Two factors seem to allow him to keep going. The first is the <a href="https://www.news24.com/fin24/economy/pic-looks-on-while-surve-inc-burns-through-state-pensioners-billions-20210127">Public Investment Corporation</a>, which invests state pensions and appears unable to stop him abusing what’s left of the 4.2 billion Rand (about US$276 million) they <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2019-01-22-pic-announces-blatant-violations-in-r4-3-billion-ayo-investment/">gave</a> to his <a href="https://ayotsl.com/">Ayo Technologies</a> group or to call in their rights as shareholders. He has them tied up in legal technicalities. </p>
<p>The second is that some major retail advertisers, short of regional outlets in which to promote their wares, continue to prop up these newspapers, despite their lack of audience.</p>
<p>The news media industry itself can only stand by and watch in dismay. The <a href="https://sanef.org.za/sanef-notes-report-about-reckless-irresponsible-journalism-at-pretoria-news-following-publication-of-decuplets/">South African National Editors Forum</a> pleaded with him to return to the voluntary self-regulatory industry framework, the Press Ombudsman and Council.</p>
<p>But he elected to <a href="https://www.sekunjalo.com/sekunjalo-in-the-news/independent-media-launches-ombud-office/">set up his own</a>, effectively making himself unaccountable and free to run rogue when it serves his purposes.</p>
<p>He has <a href="https://www.ru.ac.za/perspective/2013archive/thefiringofcapetimeseditorasignofthingstocome.html">driven out from his newsrooms</a> anyone who might be likely to stand up to him, and surrounded himself with sycophants and dependants. </p>
<p>A worrying development is the <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/news/south-africa/2021-10-28-listen-gauteng-government-to-sue-independent-media-over-thembisa-10-claims/">Gauteng provincial government</a> instructing lawyers to sue him for defaming their health workers in his media briefing when he suggested doctors and nurses were involved in trafficking.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/new-threats-to-media-freedom-come-from-unexpected-directions-148265">New threats to media freedom come from unexpected directions</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One can understand the frustration of not being able to take the matter to the Press Council. But using state resources to sue media is a worrying, often-abused process that sets a bad precedent.</p>
<p>Freedom of speech supporters were unhappy when <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2011-06-14-another-zuma-vs-zapiro-cartoon-battle-another-outrage-in-the-wall/">President Jacob Zuma sued</a> renowned South African cartoonist Zapiro. Journalist often protest against large corporates using their resources to bully their critics through malicious court action that is costly to defend. This is a wrongful use of state resources. Other ways should be found to deal with the rogue.</p>
<p>Government suing journalists and media houses provides a tool to harass and intimidate the media, and will have a chilling effect on critical reporting.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/171122/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anton Harber is a member of the SA National Editors' Forum (Sanef) and executive director of the Campaign for Free Expression.</span></em></p>Using state resources to sue media for spreading fake news is not the answer, and sets a bad precedent.Anton Harber, Caxton Professor of Journalism, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1660992021-08-16T04:56:25Z2021-08-16T04:56:25ZWhy Clive Palmer’s lockdown ads can be rejected by newspapers on ethical grounds<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/416205/original/file-20210815-27-1gqr50e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Jono Searle</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Clive Palmer’s United Australia Party advertisements inferentially objecting to COVID-19 lockdowns demonstrate one more way in which the freedoms essential to a democracy can be abused to the detriment of the public interest.</p>
<p>Democracies protect freedom of speech, especially political speech, because without it democracy cannot work. When speech is harmful, however, laws and ethical conventions exist to curb it.</p>
<p>The laws regulating political advertising are minimal.</p>
<p><a href="http://classic.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/consol_act/cea1918233/s329.html">Section 329 of the Commonwealth Electoral Act</a> is confined to the issue of whether a publication is likely to mislead or deceive an elector in relation to the casting of a vote. It has nothing to say about truth in political advertising for the good reason that defining truth in that context would be highly subjective and therefore oppressive.</p>
<p>Sections 52 and 53 of the <a href="https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2010C00426">Trade Practices Act</a> make it an offence for corporations to engage in misleading or deceptive conduct, or to make false or misleading representations. The act has nothing to say about political advertising.</p>
<p>Ad Standards, the industry self-regulator, has a code of ethics that enjoins advertisers not to engage in misleading or deceptive conduct. It is a general rule that applies to all advertising, political or not.</p>
<p>The Palmer ads do not violate any of these provisions.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/news-corp-walks-a-delicate-line-on-covid-politics-165385">News Corp walks a delicate line on COVID politics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>So where does that leave media organisations that receive an approach from the likes of Palmer to publish advertisements the terms of which are not false, misleading or deceptive, but which are clearly designed to undermine public support for public health measures such as lockdowns?</p>
<p>It leaves them having to decide whether to exercise an ethical prerogative.</p>
<p>Short of a legal requirement to do so – say, in settlement of a law suit – no media organisation is obliged to publish an advertisement. It is in almost all cases an ethical decision.</p>
<p>Naturally, freedom of speech imposes a heavy ethical burden to publish, but it is not the only consideration. John Stuart Mill’s <a href="https://ethics.org.au/ethics-explainer-the-harm-principle/">harm principle</a> becomes relevant. That principle says the prevention of harm to others is a legitimate constraint on individual freedom.</p>
<p>Undermining public support for public health measures is obviously harmful and against the public interest. Media organisations are entitled to make decisions on ethical bases like this. An example from relatively ancient history will illustrate the point.</p>
<p>In the late 1970s, 4 Corners ran a program alleging that the Utah Development Corporation’s mining activities in Queensland were causing environmental damage. A few days after the program was broadcast, The Sydney Morning Herald received a full-page advertisement from Utah not only repudiating what 4 Corners had said but attacking the professional integrity of the journalists who made the program.</p>
<p>I was chief of staff of the Herald that day and the advertisement was referred to me, partly because it contained the seeds of what might have been a news story and partly because there were concerns it might be defamatory.</p>
<p>I referred it to the executive assistant to the editor, David Bowman, who refused to publish it.</p>
<p>He objected to it not only on legal grounds but on ethical grounds, because it impugned the integrity of the journalists in circumstances where they would have no opportunity to respond. In his view, this was unfair.</p>
<p>A short while later, the advertising people came back saying Utah had offered to indemnify the Herald against any legal damages or costs arising from publication of the advertisement.</p>
<p>Bowman held to his ethical objection and was supported by the general manager, R. P. Falkingham, who said: “You don’t publish something just because a man with a lot of money stands behind you.”</p>
<p>The advertisement did not run, not because of the legal risks but because it would have breached the ethical value of fairness.</p>
<p>Palmer’s ads – which say lockdowns are bad for mental health, bad for jobs and bad for the economy – contain truisms. There is nothing false or misleading about them. But they clearly seek to exploit public resentment about lockdowns for political gain.</p>
<p>The clear intention is to stir up opposition and make the public health orders harder to enforce.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/alarmist-reporting-on-covid-19-will-only-heighten-peoples-anxieties-and-drive-vaccine-hesitancy-161170">Alarmist reporting on COVID-19 will only heighten people's anxieties and drive vaccine hesitancy</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We live in an age where there are not only high levels of public anxiety, but also a great deal of confusion about who to believe on matters such as climate change and the pandemic. It is against the public interest to add gratuitously to that confusion, and harmful to the public welfare to undermine health orders.</p>
<p>These are grounds for rejecting his advertisements.</p>
<p>Nine Entertainment, which publishes The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald and The Australian Financial Review, has rejected Palmer ads that contain misinformation about the pandemic, including about vaccines. Clearly such ads violate the rules against misleading and deceptive content.</p>
<p>But the ads opposing lockdowns on economic or health grounds were initially accepted by Nine, and are still running in News Corporation. </p>
<p>The question now is whether media organisations are willing to make decisions based on ethical considerations that are wider than the narrow standard of deception.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/166099/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Palmer’s anti-lockdown ads were not breaching any laws, so the decision about whether to run them become a purely ethical one. In the end, Nine has made the right decision.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1611702021-05-20T19:54:14Z2021-05-20T19:54:14ZAlarmist reporting on COVID-19 will only heighten people’s anxieties and drive vaccine hesitancy<p>From an ethics perspective, it has been a bad couple of weeks for media coverage of COVID-19.</p>
<p>First, there was a highly questionable <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/nation/politics/chinese-military-scientists-discussed-weaponising-sars-coronaviruses/news-story/850ae2d2e2681549cb9d21162c52d4c0">story</a> in The Australian about China allegedly weaponising coronavirus, with the headline “‘Virus warfare’ in China files” splashed across the front page.</p>
<p>The author of the article, Sharri Markson, claims a document written by Chinese scientists and Chinese public health officials in 2015 discussed the weaponisation of a SARS coronavirus.</p>
<p>According to the article, the document was headed “The Unnatural Origin of SARS and New Species of Man-Made Viruses as Genetic Bioweapons”.</p>
<p>Markson reported the US State Department had obtained the document in the course of investigating the origin of COVID-19. In her article and others that followed, there was talk of a third world war in which biological weapons would be deployed.</p>
<p>However, Chengxin Pan, an associate professor at Deakin University, offered a different explanation for the document’s origins. He said in a tweet the document Markson cited was in fact a book, the contents of which could be found on the internet or at a Chinese online bookstore.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1390961865438633985"}"></div></p>
<p>Dominic Meagher, an economist at the Lowy Institute with an extensive China background, tweeted the book was </p>
<blockquote>
<p>pretty clearly an idiotic conspiracy theory about how the US and Japan had introduced SARS to China.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The ABC program Media Watch raised these questions and more about the article’s credibility.</p>
<p>Markson has replied that the Chinese Foreign Ministry and Global Times newspaper viewed the document as legitimate and not a conspiracy theory. She said while none of the critics quoted by Media Watch were bioweapons experts, she had interviewed multiple high-level specialists in biological weapons compliance.</p>
<p>The ethical problems here are twofold. First, there are clearly questions about the provenance of the document. Was the document uncovered by a US State Department investigation or is it a book available for public sale?</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1393069205352636422"}"></div></p>
<p>It is a basic fact that colours the entire article, and the questions are not resolved by Markson’s response.</p>
<p>Second, the way the story is framed as revealing Chinese weaponising of biological material is highly alarmist. This generates further public anxiety about COVID-19 and adds to the climate of Sinophobia in Australia. The justification for doing so is, on the available evidence, highly questionable.</p>
<p>In a pandemic or any other emergency, the first ethical duty of the media is to report accurately and soberly, and specifically not to induce unjustified anxiety or panic.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/before-coronavirus-china-was-falsely-blamed-for-spreading-smallpox-racism-played-a-role-then-too-137884">Before coronavirus, China was falsely blamed for spreading smallpox. Racism played a role then, too</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Naming and shaming</h2>
<p>In another major ethical lapse, the Australian Financial Review <a href="https://www.afr.com/street-talk/apollo-global-md-contracts-covid-19-in-sydney-20210509-p57qaq">ran a story</a> that named and shamed a Sydney man who had tested positive for the virus. To make it worse, the newspaper put his photo on the front page.</p>
<p>This was wrong and irresponsible for several reasons.</p>
<p>The man had visited several barbecue shops across Sydney while unknowingly positive. When this became known as part of the media’s general contact-tracing publicity, he was dubbed “Barbecue Man” by the Sydney media.</p>
<p>So he was already a figure of fun when the Financial Review identified him. Its excuse for naming him? He was a financial analyst doing due diligence on the Barbecues Galore chain. The AFR’s editor-in-chief, Michael Stutchbury, <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2021/may/10/nsw-health-minister-condemns-media-for-naming-sydney-barbecue-man-at-centre-of-covid-outbreak">claimed</a> this meant it was in the public interest to identify him as carrying COVID.</p>
<p>That is absolute drivel. There is no rational connection between the man’s health and the health of the barbecue business.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1394253919178559491"}"></div></p>
<p>Other media, including the Daily Mail and news.com, jumped on the bandwagon and named him, too. Both outlets even ran a <a href="https://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/health-problems/tom-pizzey-identified-as-sydneys-bbq-man-and-it-explains-everything/news-story/18279a67132014b6a99f3a9da64c5193">photo grabbed from Facebook</a> of the man and his wife. No moral compass whatever.</p>
<p>If the media go on doing this, it will discourage people from coming forward for testing. Who wants to see themselves plastered over the front page and given names like Barbecue Man? That is where the irresponsibility lies.</p>
<p>The Age was guilty of something similar a couple of months ago when it <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/living-for-the-weekend-infected-hotel-quarantine-worker-s-busy-itinerary-20210204-p56zk0.html">published a map</a> of the weekend movements of a young man who was unwittingly COVID-positive and wrote an article holding him up to ridicule.</p>
<p>This kind of media behaviour is mediaeval: like putting people in the stocks and chucking rotten tomatoes at them. And it is a gross breach of privacy. A person’s health is among the most private classes of information that exists. To breach it for the sake of a cheap laugh is indefensible.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-ebb-and-flow-of-covid-19-vaccine-support-what-social-media-tells-us-about-australians-and-the-jab-157874">The ebb and flow of COVID-19 vaccine support: what social media tells us about Australians and the jab</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Avoiding misleading information</h2>
<p>These weren’t the only problematic reports. On May 13, the Australian Press Council <a href="https://www.presscouncil.org.au/document-search/adj-1797/">found</a> a subhead in the Herald Sun saying “Six People Died During Pfizer Trial” was misleading because it implied the vaccine caused the deaths, when in fact the deaths were not related to the vaccine. </p>
<p>Four of the six deceased had been given a placebo during the trial, and the other two deaths were not related to the vaccine.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1394810694965420035"}"></div></p>
<p>The Herald Sun defended the subhead on the basis the story said the US Food and Drug Administration had been told about these deaths because they occurred during the period of the trial.</p>
<p>That is materially different from implying – as the headline clearly did – that the vaccine caused the deaths.</p>
<p>The press council said that newspapers needed to take more than usual care to avoid misleading the public in the midst of a pandemic. And by failing to do so, the Herald Sun had breached two of the council’s principles — one concerning accuracy and the other concerning fairness and balance.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/just-the-facts-or-more-detail-to-battle-vaccine-hesitancy-the-messaging-has-to-be-just-right-155953">Just the facts, or more detail? To battle vaccine hesitancy, the messaging has to be just right</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>In an atmosphere where there is already a <a href="https://www1.racgp.org.au/newsgp/clinical/growing-number-of-australians-say-they-will-never">degree of resistance</a> to being vaccinated, the Herald Sun subhead was clearly a beat-up with the potential to harm the public interest.</p>
<p>So, in the space of a couple of weeks elements of the print media have sought to capitalise without justification on public anxieties about China and the safety of COVID vaccines, and have pilloried an innocent man while at the same time committing a gross breach of his personal privacy.</p>
<p>In an age when the public must rely increasingly on the mass media for reliable and responsible information — since social media has shown itself to be unreliable and irresponsible — these newspapers have abrogated their first duty to the public.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/161170/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>In a pandemic or any other emergency, the first ethical duty of the media is to report accurately and soberly, and specifically not to induce unjustified anxiety or panic.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1609922021-05-19T19:59:32Z2021-05-19T19:59:32ZWhen it comes to media reporting on Israel-Palestine, there is nowhere to hide<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/401505/original/file-20210519-19-1nozjb8.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/EPA/Mohammed Saber</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>As lethal violence kills ordinary people in Gaza and Israel, news outlets across the globe are constructing versions of events that will keep eyeballs on their content. </p>
<p>After all, war is <a href="https://www.google.com.au/books/edition/A_History_of_News/gsUaAQAAIAAJ?hl=en">the most compelling news story of all</a>. And given many people who care about this situation have no direct experience of it, they depend on media reports to form a view.</p>
<p>But when reporting on something as terrible as political violence, journalists face an impossible choice. </p>
<p>While professional ethics of journalism demand “objectivity”, language just won’t come to the party. This is because language has no neutral mode. Once you step into the process of saying anything about the violence in Gaza, language makes you take a side. </p>
<p>There are essentially <a href="https://www.springer.com/gp/book/9789811309946">two main modes for reporting on geopolitical violence</a>. The first and dominant mode is typical of mainstream news reporting. It strives for objectivity by presenting selective factual events devoid of context. It briefly summarises complex events, while not allocating blame or responsibility. </p>
<p>While the effects of events on ordinary people can be reported on, these are typically presented as an unfortunate but unavoidable byproduct of something otherwise official, rational and purposeful.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-is-accountability-for-alleged-war-crimes-so-hard-to-achieve-in-the-israel-palestinian-conflict-160864">Why is accountability for alleged war crimes so hard to achieve in the Israel-Palestinian conflict?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This style is susceptible to the favoured tropes of militaries and, therefore, to inadvertently reproducing official narratives. Destructive and lethal violence becomes obscured by terminology like “operations”, “campaigns”, “offensives”, “strategies”, “targets” and “phases”.</p>
<p>This language construes the violence as if it has a higher purpose. The particularly eager journalist will report the official name of an “operation”, as in this example, where <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-57152419?xtor=AL-72-%5Bpartner%5D-%5Bbbc.news.twitter%5D-%5Bheadline%5D-%5Bnews%5D-%5Bbizdev%5D-%5Bisapi%5D&at_custom4=3BDDB396-B770-11EB-A317-4AC04744363C&at_campaign=64&at_medium=custom7&at_custom2=twitter&at_custom1=%5Bpost+type%5D&at_custom3=%40BBCWorld">the BBC’s diplomatic correspondent</a> tells readers Israel has named its operation “Guardian of the Walls”.</p>
<p>And they will expound on the types of weapons technology being employed, as if the make and model of the plane and the bombs it unleashes have any real bearing on these events.</p>
<p>The problem with this mode of reporting is that violence is objectified and dehumanised. Objectifying violence means it is construed as if it happens by itself, without reference to either the political masters who order it, or those tasked with enacting it. </p>
<p>And dehumanised, because it fails to put front and centre the most important perspective of these events: those killed, injured, bereaved and traumatised by the actions of <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Sociology-War-Violence-Sinisa-Malesevic/dp/0521731690">(usually male) leaders</a>, who refuse alternative means of resolving differences. </p>
<p>Here’s an example of this “objective” style from <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/av/world-middle-east-57138838">a recent report on the BBC’s website</a>. The violence, referred to as a “conflict”, as “rockets and air strikes” continuing, as a “concentration of militant rocket fire”, as “Israeli air strikes”, is all divorced from the human agents of this violence. </p>
<p>And the dead Israelis are killed “in rocket attacks”, while the scores of dead Palestinians are simply a “death toll”.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=565&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401190/original/file-20210518-15-im2td2.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=710&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">BBC news report.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>An obvious and often conscious effect of this style is to treat two sides as if they are equal participants in this violence. This is the effect of journalistic shorthand, such as the “Israel Gaza conflict”, or the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict”. </p>
<p>These formulations avoid allocating blame to one side or the other. The BBC report shows a scrupulous formulation so that “rockets and air strikes” appear side by side, even when the syntax of this formulation doesn’t make sense. In their phrase “rockets and air strikes have continued”, while “airstrikes” can continue, “rockets” themselves can’t. </p>
<p>And the “they said while the others said” structure keeps up the illusion that this violence is symmetrical. </p>
<p>I don’t want to minimise the horror for ordinary Israelis of suffering rockets fired by Hamas foot soldiers. I can’t begin to imagine the fear that I could lose a child to this kind of horrendous violence. </p>
<p>But the <a href="https://www.theage.com.au/world/middle-east/thai-workers-killed-in-israel-palestinian-conflict-as-truce-calls-mount-20210518-p57t2r.html">numbers of dead and scale of destruction</a> belie this false equivalence. Just ask yourself: where would you rather be?</p>
<p>Herein lies the alternative mode of reporting this violence. When the violence you are reporting on is illegitimate, you naturally strive for language that fails the “objectivity” test. </p>
<p>You will focus on the brutal and inhumane consequences of the violence. You will make the perpetrators of the violence visible, and you will demonise them. You will emphasise the scale of the violence and its devastating effects on families and communities.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/many-questions-few-answers-as-conflict-deepens-between-israelis-and-palestinians-160921">Many questions, few answers, as conflict deepens between Israelis and Palestinians</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We can see these linguistic features in the <a href="https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/tamara-nassar/israel-kills-children-doctors-horrific-nighttime-massacre">reporting by The Electronic Intifada</a>. </p>
<p>The style goes against everything in the standard journalism textbook. But its crowning, remarkable achievement is that, of everything that is going on, the killing of children is at the heart of this news report. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=361&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/401191/original/file-20210518-15-1dzczzk.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=453&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">News report from The Electronic Intifada.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>While we like to believe that what we politely call “war” is used as a last resort, this <a href="https://www.amazon.com/Civilizations-Empires-Wars-Quantitative-History/dp/0899507093">quantitative history of war</a> shows that, as time goes on, human societies have been more addicted to war, that what we think of “civilisation” appears to correlate with more and more lethal wars.</p>
<p>For the journalists who report this violence on our behalf, there is nowhere to hide. There is no neutral, objective mode. Your choice is to stand so far back from the “conflict” that you obscure its brutal irrationality and, in so doing, unwittingly or otherwise, put your support behind the most powerful belligerents.</p>
<p>Or you can come in close and show mutilated and traumatised children, and suffer the journalistic ignominy of “biased” reporting.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/160992/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Annabelle Lukin does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Journalistic ethics demand ‘objectivity’ in reporting – but language forces us to take a position.Annabelle Lukin, Associate Professor in Linguistics, Macquarie UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1563902021-03-03T08:04:20Z2021-03-03T08:04:20ZHas Christian Porter been subjected to a ‘trial by media’? No, the media did its job of being a watchdog<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/387444/original/file-20210303-22-13bqwq4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/Richard Wainwright</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Aside from his strenuous denials of the rape allegation against him, the central point made by Attorney-General Christian Porter at his media conference was that he had been the victim of “trial by media”.</p>
<p>He warned if the media’s publication of allegations in these circumstances resulted in a public figure being forced from office, it would represent a new and unacceptable standard for public figures generally.</p>
<p>He also said no one in the media had confronted him with the allegation. And he said that when Prime Minister Scott Morrison discussed the matter with him last week, the document containing the allegation had already been sent to the Australian Federal Police, so he had not seen it on that occasion either.</p>
<p>These are important questions deserving of scrutiny.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1366965892978860035"}"></div></p>
<h2>What constitutes a ‘trial by media’?</h2>
<p>“Trial by media” is one of those phrases that trips off the tongue in cases where the media apply intense pressure on a person or organisation at the centre of an issue.</p>
<p>Trial by media occurs when either of two things happen. The first is where media coverage prejudices the outcome of legal processes, such as police investigations or trials in court. The second is when the media initiate an issue and then proceed to play prosecutor, judge and jury.</p>
<p>Neither applies in the Porter case.</p>
<p>As far as is known, there are no police investigations or legal proceedings on foot and there has been little prospect there would be, given the woman who made the allegations is now dead. The South Australian police are preparing a report for the coroner, an investigation that by definition is confined to the circumstances of the person’s death.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/attorney-general-christian-porter-declares-alleged-rape-did-not-happen-and-he-wont-stand-down-156381">Attorney-General Christian Porter declares alleged rape 'did not happen' – and he won't stand down</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The New South Wales police investigation was suspended after the woman took her life in June last year, and this week, Commissioner Mick Fuller said the <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-02/nsw-police-close-investigation-into-historical-rape-allegation/13206372">case was closed</a>. </p>
<p>The South Australian police commissioner <a href="https://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/south-australia/sa-police-commissioner-grant-stevens-to-meet-with-afp-on-parliament-rape-allegation/news-story/dafc35cf0a24bf1cdc0730929a3b9f28">discussed the matter</a> with the NSW and AFP commissioners this week, as well, but has made no comment on whether his force would pursue an investigation. The AFP has no jurisdiction.</p>
<p>So much for the first test of trial by media.</p>
<p>The media also did not initiate the allegation. That was done in a 31-page letter sent anonymously to politicians on both sides of federal parliament, including Morrison and the Labor leader in the Senate, Penny Wong.</p>
<p>The ABC obtained a copy of this document and reported the allegation without naming Porter, saying only that it referred to a senior cabinet minister. The rest of the media then reported the story, also without naming Porter.</p>
<p>It would have been legally perilous and ethically unconscionable for the media to do so without putting the allegation to him.</p>
<h2>How should the media have handled the allegation?</h2>
<p>This raises the question: should the media have put it to Porter?</p>
<p>In principle, as a matter of fairness, yes. As a practical matter, however, it is a very difficult proposition.</p>
<p>No doubt the ABC and other media would have obtained pre-publication legal advice about this.</p>
<p>The first difficulty the media face in these circumstances is the accused person might not give an answer but make a threat to sue for defamation. Given the weakness of defences in defamation law in Australia, it would be a very risky business to publish in the face of such a threat.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/media-companies-can-now-be-held-responsible-for-your-dodgy-comments-on-social-media-139775">Media companies can now be held responsible for your dodgy comments on social media</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Even publishing what is called a “denial story” is risky because of the damage to reputation inherent in the question. If the media publish a story saying Porter denied a rape allegation, this leaves open the question of whether he is to be believed. </p>
<p>A story based on a voluntary public statement of the kind he made this week, however, is an altogether different situation.</p>
<p>The second difficulty is there is always the chance the accused person will obtain an injunction restraining publication. In a case like this, there is a good chance the court would also issue a “super injunction” banning the reporting of the fact that an injunction had been granted.</p>
<p>This would have tied up the matter in the courts, probably for weeks.</p>
<h2>A political matter, not one for the media</h2>
<p>Clearly, the media decided to treat this as a political story and watch it play out in the political process.</p>
<p>Of course, the media are part of the political process. The part they play is that of watchdog and commentator, and in this case, virtually all of the scrutiny was on Morrison’s response.</p>
<p>He was already under pressure for the way he and his government handled the rape allegation made by former staffer Brittany Higgins. A new allegation against a member of his cabinet intensified that pressure enormously.</p>
<p>When did he know? What did he know? How did he know? What did he do? What does he intend to do?</p>
<p>These are all legitimate questions and have nothing to do with the rights and wrongs of the allegation itself. They have everything to do with how the prime minister handles another alleged incident of sexual misconduct involving someone in his government.</p>
<p>Porter’s outing himself took the political process a step further. As he himself said at his media conference, where it goes from here is for others to decide.</p>
<p>Should there be an inquiry like the one instigated by the High Court concerning the conduct of the former justice Dyson Heydon? Again, the media spotlight returns to the prime minister for answers.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/social-media-and-defamation-law-pose-threats-to-free-speech-and-its-time-for-reform-64864">Social media and defamation law pose threats to free speech, and it's time for reform</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<hr>
<p><em>If this article has raised issues for you, or if you’re concerned about someone you know, call the 1800 Respect national helpline on 1800 737 732 or Lifeline on 13 11 14.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/156390/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The media treated the rape allegation against Porter as a political story and watched it play out in the political process — without identifying the attorney-general.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1534512021-01-20T19:08:48Z2021-01-20T19:08:48ZTo publish or not to publish? The media’s free-speech dilemmas in a world of division, violence and extremism<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379657/original/file-20210120-13-1ockv3v.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/AP/ John Nacion/STAR MAX/IPx</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Terrorism, political extremism, Donald Trump, social media and the phenomenon of “cancel culture” are confronting journalists with a range of agonising free-speech dilemmas to which there are no easy answers.</p>
<p>Do they allow a president of the United States to use their platforms to falsely and provocatively claim the election he has just lost was stolen from him?</p>
<p>How do they cover the activities and rhetoric of political extremists without giving oxygen to race hate and civil insurrection?</p>
<p>How do they integrate news-making social media material into their own content, when it is also hateful or a threat to the civil peace?</p>
<p>Should journalists engage in, or take a stand against, “<a href="https://www.vox.com/culture/2019/12/30/20879720/what-is-cancel-culture-explained-history-debate">cancel culture</a>”?</p>
<p>How should editors respond to the “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/opinion/subjecting-free-speech-to-the-assassins-veto-20150508-ggx374.html">assassin’s veto</a>”, when extremists threaten to kill those who publish content that offends their culture or religion?</p>
<p>The West has experienced concrete examples of all these in recent years. In the US, many of them became pressing during the Trump presidency.</p>
<p>When five of the big US television networks <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-11-06/us-media-cuts-away-from-trumps-speech-citing-false-statements/12858350">cut away from Trump’s White House press conference</a> on November 6 after he claimed the election had been stolen, they did so on the grounds that he was lying and endangering civil peace.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/to-stay-or-cut-away-as-trump-makes-baseless-claims-tv-networks-are-faced-with-a-serious-dilemma-149628">To stay or cut away? As Trump makes baseless claims, TV networks are faced with a serious dilemma</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Silencing the president was an extraordinary step, since it is the job of the media to tell people what is going on, hold public officials to account, and uphold the right to free speech. It looked like an abandonment of their role in democratic life.</p>
<p>Against that, television’s acknowledged reach and power imposes a heavy duty not to provide a platform for dangerous speech.</p>
<p>Then on January 6 – two months later to the day – after yet more incitement from Trump, a violent mob <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/10/us/politics/capitol-siege-security.html">laid siege to the Capitol</a> and five people lost their lives. The networks’ decision looked prescient.</p>
<p>They had acted on the principle that a clear and present danger to civil peace, based on credible evidence, should be prioritised over commitments to informing the public, holding public officials to account and freedom of speech.</p>
<p>This case also raised a further dilemma. Even if the danger to peace did not exist, should journalists just go on reporting – or broadcasting – known lies, even when they come from the president of the United States?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/no-twitter-is-not-censoring-donald-trump-free-speech-is-not-guaranteed-if-it-harms-others-153092">No, Twitter is not censoring Donald Trump. Free speech is not guaranteed if it harms others</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Newspaper editors and producers of pre-recorded radio and television content have the time to report lies while simultaneously calling them out as lies. Live radio and television do not. The words are out and the damage is done.</p>
<p>So the medium, the nature and size of the risk, how the informational and accountability functions of journalism are prioritised against the risk, and the free-speech imperative all play into these decisions.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379658/original/file-20210120-17-1b2s8ov.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Should the media report known lies, even if uttered by the president of the United States?</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/EPA/White House handout</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Similar considerations arise in respect of reporting political extremism.</p>
<p>The ABC’s Four Corners program is about to embark on a story about the alt-right in the US. Having advertised this in a <a href="https://twitter.com/neighbour_s/status/1349241500220100608">promotional tweet</a>, the ABC received some social media blow-back raising the question of why it would give oxygen to these groups.</p>
<p>The influence of the alt-right on Western politics is a matter of real public interest because of the way it shapes political rhetoric and policy responses, particular on race and immigration.</p>
<p>To not report on this phenomenon because it pursues a morally reprehensible ideology would be to fail the ethical obligation of journalism to tell the community about the important things that are going on in the world.</p>
<p>It is not a question of whether to report, but how.</p>
<p>The Four Corners program will not be live to air. There will be opportunity for judicious editing. Journalists are under no obligation to report everything they are told. In fact they almost never do.</p>
<h2>Motive matters</h2>
<p>Whether the decision to omit is censorship comes down to motive: is it censorship to omit hate speech or incitement to violence? No. Because the reporter doesn’t agree with it? Yes.</p>
<p>Integrating social media content into professional mass media news presents all these complexities and one more: what is called the news value of “virality”.</p>
<p>Does the fact something has gone viral on social media make it news? For the more responsible professional mass media, something more will usually be needed. Does the subject matter affect large numbers of people? Is it inherently significant in some way? Does it involve some person who is in a position of authority or public trust?</p>
<p>Trump’s use of Twitter was an exploitation of these decision-rules, but did not invalidate them.</p>
<p>Social media is also the means by which “cancel culture” works. It enables large numbers of people to join a chorus of condemnation against someone for something they have said or done. It also puts pressure on institutions such as universities or media outlets to shun them.</p>
<p>It has become a means by which the otherwise powerless or voiceless can exert influence over people or organisations that would otherwise be beyond their reach.</p>
<p>There are those who are worried about the effects on free speech. In July 2020, Harper’s magazine <a href="https://harpers.org/a-letter-on-justice-and-open-debate/">published a letter of protest</a> signed by 152 authors, academics, journalists, artists, poets, playwrights and critics.</p>
<p>While applauding the intentions behind “cancel culture” in advancing racial and social justice, they raised their voices against what they saw as a new set of moral attitudes that tended to favour ideological conformity.</p>
<p>In the aftermath of the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/12/30/950053607/in-2020-protests-spread-across-the-globe-with-a-similar-message-black-lives-matt">police killings of black people in 2020</a> and the law-and-order response of the Trump administration, “cancel culture” began to affect journalism ethics. Some journalists on <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/ignited-by-public-protests-american-newsrooms-are-having-their-own-racial-reckoning/2020/06/12/be622bce-a995-11ea-94d2-d7bc43b26bf9_story.html">papers such as The Washington Post</a> and The New York Times began taking public positions against the way their papers were reporting race issues.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/379659/original/file-20210120-23-1stiyr4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">In the aftermath of the Black Lives Matter protests, some journalists began to question how their papers covered race issues.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">AAP/AP/Evan Vucci</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It led to a lively debate in the profession about the extent to which moral preferences should shape news decisions. The riposte to those who argued that they should, was: whose moral preferences should prevail?</p>
<p>This was yet another illustration of the complexities surrounding free speech issues arising from the social media phenomenon, the Trump presidency and the combination of the two.</p>
<p>Terrorism has also added its contribution. Over the decade 2005-2015, what became known as <a href="https://www.pbs.org/newshour/extra/daily-videos/prophet-muhammad-cartoon-debate-continues-10-years-later/">the Danish cartoons</a> confronted journalists and editors with life-and-death decisions.</p>
<p>In 2005, the Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten (Jutland Post) published cartoons lampooning the Prophet Mohammed. It was a conscious act of defiance against “the assassin’s veto”, violent threats to free speech by Islamist-jihadis.</p>
<p>In 2009, a Danish-born professor of politics wrote a book, <a href="https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300124729/cartoons-shook-world">The Cartoons that Shook the World</a>. Yale University Press, which published it, refused to re-publish the cartoons after having taken advice from counter-terrorism experts about the risks.</p>
<p>In November 2011, the French satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-15551998">published an issue called Charia Hebdo</a>, satirically featuring the Prophet as editor. The real editor was placed on an Al-Qaeda hit list and in January 2015, two masked gunmen <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-30710883">opened fire on the newspaper office</a>, killing 12 people, including the editor.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/charlie-hebdo-the-pen-must-defy-the-sword-islamic-or-not-36006">Charlie Hebdo: the pen must defy the sword, Islamic or not</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The world’s media were confronted with the decision whether to re-publish the cartoons again in defiance of “the assassin’s veto”. Some did, but most – including Jyllands Posten – did not.</p>
<h2>The necessary limits of free speech</h2>
<p>Free speech is an indispensable civil right under assault from all these forces. But none of the philosophers whose names we immediately associate with free speech have claimed it to be absolute.</p>
<p>The social media platforms, having for years proclaimed themselves extreme libertarians, have in recent times begun to recognise this is indefensible, and strengthened their moderating procedures.</p>
<p>Some of Australia’s senior politicians seem baffled by the issue.</p>
<p>When Twitter shut down Trump’s account, acting Prime Minister Michael McCormack didn’t seem to know where he stood, saying in one breath it was <a href="https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-01-11/twitter-censorship-donald-trump-australia-michael-mccormack/13046656">a violation of free speech to shut down Trump</a> while in the next that Twitter should also take down the false image of an Australian soldier slitting the throat of an Afghan child.</p>
<p>And he is a former country newspaper editor.</p>
<p>This was followed by Treasurer Josh Frydenberg’s remark that he was “<a href="https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/senior-ministers-take-aim-at-trump-social-media-silencing-20210111-p56t7n.html">uncomfortable</a>” with the Twitter decision. He quoted Voltaire as saying something Voltaire never said: the famous line that while he disagreed with what someone said, he would defend to the death his right to say it. It was a fabrication <a href="https://checkyourfact.com/2019/09/17/fact-check-voltaire-disapprove-defend-death-right-freedom-speech/">put into Voltaire’s mouth by a biographer</a> more than 100 years after his death.</p>
<p>Voltaire, Milton, Spinoza, Locke and Mill, to say nothing of the US Supreme Court, have not regarded free speech as an absolute right.</p>
<p>So while the media face some extremely difficult decisions in today’s operating environment, they do not need to burden themselves with the belief that every decision not to publish is the violation of an inviolable right.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/153451/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Denis Muller does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>What to publish on incendiary issues is a complex matter, but journalists needn’t believe that not publishing, when there is a good reason, violates and inviolable right.Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of MelbourneLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1460122020-09-23T14:56:53Z2020-09-23T14:56:53ZWant to make the news better? Shatter the status quo<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358394/original/file-20200916-16-1m8bvad.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C5568%2C3450&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Journalists must do more than cover news events. They must challenge the status quo, and dig deeper into the stories they cover. Journalists are seen in a scrum at the federal Liberal cabinet retreat in September 2020.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Sean Kilpatrick</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>One of the most important functions of journalism in a democratic society is to act as a watchdog — to call out abuses of power or wrongdoing. </p>
<p>Journalism builds on the standard of the watchdog function — or, what’s described <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5406/j.ctt1xcjws">in the 2009 book</a> <em>Normative Theories of the Media: Journalism in Democratic Societies</em> as journalism’s “monitorial role.”</p>
<p>But the watchdog function of the news, as the book explains, is not the only role journalism can play. Yes, it’s vital for journalists to act as society’s burglar alarms. However, journalism can and should take on other functions in a democratic society. </p>
<p>One of the most important is to challenge the status quo — to force us to confront our assumptions about how the world works. </p>
<h2>Widening the lens</h2>
<p>The COVID-19 pandemic, as well as worldwide protests against anti-Black racism, have forced society and journalists to confront many of our assumptions about issues like the power of police, white privilege and the various other inequalities that disproportionately affect racialized communities. </p>
<p>Limiting journalism to merely watching over and reporting on these events narrows the range and scope of all the things that journalism can and should be doing. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="People stand in the sun with shadows cast in front of them." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358388/original/file-20200916-20-p7fs9z.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Demonstrators rally at Los Angeles City Hall during a protest against racial injustice and police brutality in August 2020.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Michael Schudson, a journalism professor at Columbia University, <a href="https://wwnorton.com/books/9780393912876">describes the news media</a> as the tip of the social iceberg. Below the tip are institutional structures and social forces that often go unrecognized and, as a result, are under-reported or under-examined. </p>
<p>Expanding the range of what journalism could and should do is about <a href="https://thewholestory.solutionsjournalism.org/complicating-the-narratives-b91ea06ddf63?gi=14bec971272f">diving deeper</a> and getting at all that is going on below the tip of the iceberg — to unpack the historical context and the <a href="https://www.amazon.ca/Global-Standard-Reporting-Conflict/dp/1138222577">underlying causes</a> at the root of complex stories. </p>
<p>Journalism is rightly concerned with fairness and accuracy, but those standards are usually achieved through the idea of balance, and the use of traditionally accepted sources. But balance can be an inadequate standard, because it can reduce complex stories to binaries pitting one side against the other. <a href="https://www.kqed.org/education/531972/false-equivalence-why-its-so-dangerous-above-the-noise">False equivalency</a> is obviously hugely problematic. </p>
<p>Professed norms of reporting also limit journalists to a limited selection of sources, notably people with some kind of power or authority. The perspectives and lived experiences of women, people of colour, minority groups or marginalized communities are, as a result, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/23/opinion/objectivity-black-journalists-coronavirus.html">regularly overlooked</a> or relegated to the background, usually subconsciously. </p>
<h2>Calling out problems</h2>
<p>Journalism is great at calling out problems from stories requiring months of investigative work to day-to-day coverage. However, it’s much more difficult for the news to effectively get at the causes behind those problems — the ambiguities and the social and historical dynamics that explain why certain things are the way they are. </p>
<p>For journalists, there is a fine line between telling people about a problem, and telling people what to do about the problem. The former is within the purview of journalism; the latter falls squarely in the realm of advocacy or policy. </p>
<p>There is, however, a role for journalism — largely unfulfilled — to get at the roots of social challenges, and to identify responses to them. This isn’t about journalists telling you what to do; it’s about giving you a fuller picture of what you need to know. </p>
<p>Such reporting takes a high degree of skill, involving analytical framing and <a href="https://www.amazon.ca/Why-Democracies-Need-Unlovable-Press/dp/0745644538">what Schudson calls</a> “social empathy.” It takes a lot of skill to tell a story that feels fresh and newsworthy, but that also brings underlying dynamics out from behind the wings and onto centre stage. </p>
<h2>Opioid crisis</h2>
<p>Consider the opioid crisis. Stories about crime affecting local residents and businesses are relatively straightforward and easy to tell, and they capture attention. </p>
<p>However, such an approach largely strips the story of its context — notably, the fact that substance abuse is not a crime problem, requiring a crime control response, but may be a mental health issue, one that often, though not always, affects people on the margins of society. That context is not somehow peripheral to the story; in fact, it <em>is</em> the story.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="Two people wheel a giant opioid spoon." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358392/original/file-20200916-22-uwus3g.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Members of the Opioid Spoon Project wheel a sculpture of a large spoon at Johnson and Johnson headquarters in New Brunswick, N.J., on Sept. 18, 2019. The organization is trying to bring attention to the opioid crisis and the companies they claim helped to create the crisis.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">(AP Photo/Seth Wenig)</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Journalism can and should address subconscious social bias, wherever such bias exists. This includes, but is not limited to, taking on an <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/ibram-x-kendi-wants-to-redefine-racism/id1081584611?i=1000452609664">anti-racist ethos</a> to actively challenge existing power dynamics. </p>
<p>Doing this work involves a philosophical change in how journalists see their role. What would news stories look like as a result of this change in mindset? </p>
<h2>Rethinking police</h2>
<p>For example, policing would not automatically be seen in the context of crime control, as is the current standard. </p>
<p>Instead, journalism would explore policing as matter of <a href="https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/cj-jp/yj-jj/discre/org/supp-appu.html">community building</a>. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/force-is-no-substitute-for-social-justice-so-lets-dismantle-the-police-145221">Force is no substitute for social justice, so let's dismantle the police</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Or news reporting would actively challenge the idea of substance abuse as somehow a choice that people make, and instead report on it through a lens of sensitivity and understanding. </p>
<p>Journalism has so much more potential and power to go beyond its conventional watchdog role. But broadening the scope of journalism involves reporters and editors adopting an entirely different philosophical approach for the benefit of audiences, sources — and journalists too.</p>
<p>It’s hard to challenge assumptions, but journalism is perfectly suited to confront the status quo. This isn’t advocacy; it’s just good journalism.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146012/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Kamyar Razavi does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>It’s not enough anymore for journalists to be mere watchdogs. Journalism must address subconscious social biases to give readers a fuller picture of what they need to know.Kamyar Razavi, PhD candidate in the School of Communication, Simon Fraser UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1463642020-09-17T11:32:55Z2020-09-17T11:32:55ZJournalism makes blunders but still feeds democracy: an insider’s view<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358415/original/file-20200916-18-1m52ofg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Sunday Times, South Africa's largest weekend newspaper, was used to spread disinformation. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Gianluigi Guercia/AFP via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><em>Anton Harber, the veteran South African journalist, editor and journalism professor at the University of the Witwatersrand, has a new book out. <a href="https://www.graffitiboeke.co.za/en/a/Search/0/date_publish%20DESC/Anton%20Harber"><em>So, For the Record: Behind the Headlines in an Era of State Capture</em></a> is a deep dive into the conduct of the media as mega corruption and state capture engulfed and eventually brought down President Jacob Zuma’s administration. Politics editor Thabo Leshilo asked the author to provide the highlights.</em></p>
<h2>What prompted you to write the book?</h2>
<p>For one thing, it is a great story to tell, complete with all the ingredients of a thriller: brothels, spies, brown envelopes and honeypots, all laced with intrigue, deceit and backstabbing. My interest, though, came from a concern that our community of journalists was not dealing properly with the series of journalistic fiascos at the <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/">Sunday Times</a>, the country’s biggest and most powerful newspaper. </p>
<p>I was on a panel commissioned to conduct an <a href="https://www.politicsweb.co.za/home?code=bEk4K3BwY1NMOEVqQndtdVNuMEQ0dz09&state=">internal investigation</a> at the paper in 2007, after a similar series of journalistic disasters. Our far-reaching recommendations were not implemented. And so, perhaps inevitably, the paper went off the rails again in 2011-6 with another series of stories that boosted those trying to capture state institutions for corrupt purposes. The paper had to retract and apologise for these disastrous stories. </p>
<p>As journalists, we hold those in power to account and demand full transparency from them. But we also wield public power, so I think it is crucial that we hold ourselves to account when we mess up. If we don’t, the politicians will step in and that would be a disaster. </p>
<p>Media self-criticism is not just important to improve our journalism, it is a political, professional and moral imperative. That is why I thought it important to take a deep dive into what happened at the Sunday Times.</p>
<p>The other reason is that this same period saw some of finest and most effective investigative journalism in this country. The <a href="https://www.gupta-leaks.com/">#GuptaLeaks exposé</a> in particular contributed to bringing down a president. The email leaks provided the evidence of the extraordinary and malign influence the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-22513410">Gupta brothers</a>– who stand accused of having captured the South African state for their enrichment – had over the president and his family.</p>
<p>Taken together, I thought these parallel tales would provide insight into the highs and lows of journalism, showing its importance and value, but also its limitations and problems. I hope to enable a better public understanding of the work of journalists and the media, as I think that there is confusion over what we do and don’t do in our newsrooms. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/jurgen-schadeberg-chronicler-of-life-across-apartheids-divides-145390">Jürgen Schadeberg: chronicler of life across apartheid’s divides</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>This was not just a Sunday Times issue, but it was about the nature and state of our media, and hopefully I offer some insight into that.</p>
<p>As someone who was involved in the 2007 report, knew all the characters well, and who had been part of judging panels for the <a href="https://journalism.co.za/tacokuiper/">Taco Kuiper Award</a> for investigative journalism, which recognised the Sunday Times for one of these stories and then <a href="https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/sunday-times-taco-kuiper-runnerup-award-revoked--a">withdrew that recognition</a>, I had a rare personal perspective on events.</p>
<p>In a way, the book is a personal account from an insider, and I hope I bring to bear an understanding of journalism derived from 40 years of practice, including my own fair share of journalistic blunders.</p>
<h2>Why do your findings matter?</h2>
<p>I hope that I show how good journalism nourishes and feeds citizenship and democracy, but also that it is an imperfect profession working in imperfect structures in an imperfect society - and we need to face up to the reality of what this means.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=909&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=909&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=909&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1143&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1143&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/358561/original/file-20200917-16-a56ee9.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1143&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption"></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Journalism can do some good, and it can do a lot of harm, and it usually does both. We have to try and understand how to try and do more good and less harm. This is particularly important at a time when the work we do is facing the triple onslaught of political, financial and disinformation storms.</p>
<p>An important element of the story is how state structures, such as the <a href="http://www.ssa.gov.za/">State Security Agency</a> and <a href="https://www.saps.gov.za/about/stratframework/annual_report/2010_2011/6_prg4_crime_intelligence.pdf">Police Crime Intelligence</a>, deliberately and malevolently interfered to distort and harm our journalism for their own purposes. The question to ask is:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>what was it about the Sunday Times that made this newsroom fall for these tricks, when others didn’t? </p>
</blockquote>
<p>We have a lot to fix in this country, and as journalists we can start by trying to fix our journalism and our media.</p>
<h2>What are the implications for the media?</h2>
<p>What I highlight is that this is not a problem affecting one newspaper. The problem runs deep in the structure and history of our media. Hopefully, those reading my book will get a better understanding of this and be better equipped for a discussion about what needs to be done to make our media and our democracy work better. </p>
<p>We are facing an onslaught of disinformation, enabled by social media, and we cannot counter it unless we rebuild journalism so that it is a valued and trusted part of our society.</p>
<h2>How can media houses and journalists fix the problems you identify?</h2>
<p>First we need to understand the problem and its causes. That is what I explore in the book. Part of this is to see that this is not a problem for media houses or journalists alone. This is a social, political and economic problem that can’t be solved by the media industry on its own. We have to work with the private sector, the public sector, the philanthropic sector, civil society and the state to ensure we have a media that meets our society’s needs. </p>
<p>We cannot deal with the issues of professionalism and accountability without solving the problems of the fundamental economic structure of the industry. To be a quality industry, we need to be a strong one, and to do this, we need to find a new way to restore its financial foundation.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/journalism-of-drums-heyday-remains-cause-for-celebration-70-years-later-142668">Journalism of Drum's heyday remains cause for celebration - 70 years later</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>We are in the extraordinary position where philanthropically funded journalism appears to be more sustainable than the traditional advertising-driven model. This is an inversion of what we always accepted as reality. We are caught in a bind: we need citizens to value us enough to pay for our services in some form, but we don’t have the resources to produce the journalism that would show that value. We first have to recognise that this is a national and societal problem, not just a media one, and then we can tackle it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/146364/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anton Harber was a member of the internal panel appointed in 2007 to examine problems at the Sunday Times. He was a judge in the Taco Kuiper Award for Investigative Journalism and the Global Shining Light Awards, both of which recognised one of the stories dealt with in the book. The Taco Kuiper Award panel withdrew Sunday Time's 2011 runner-up award in 2018.</span></em></p>Media self-criticism is not just important to improve journalism, it is a political, professional and moral imperative.Anton Harber, Caxton Professor of Journalism, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1442612020-09-02T12:21:18Z2020-09-02T12:21:18ZHow to read coronavirus news and learn what you actually need to know about staying safe in the pandemic<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355573/original/file-20200831-20-3tp9yh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C8%2C2995%2C1985&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The news helps people navigate a complex and changing pandemic world. But they may not always remember what they need to. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="http://www.apimages.com/metadata/Index/Virus-Outbreak-Business-Fallout/ebe4500425c1429cbe29601c05463310/10/0">AP Photo/Damian Dovarganes</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>With COVID-19, a news story that may be 100% accurate can still unintentionally mislead readers about the greatest threats of the pandemic. The unintended outcome results from a lesson taught to every journalism student: Use “real people” to “humanize” the news. </p>
<p>The “real person” in COVID-19 stories may be <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/children-and-the-virus-as-schools-reopen-much-remains-unknown-about-the-risk-to-kids-and-the-peril-they-pose-to-others/2020/08/09/e40f0862-d81e-11ea-930e-d88518c57dcc_story.html">a mom</a> concerned about her child getting sick in the classroom, used as an example in an article about schools reopening. It may be the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/11/us/virus-young-deaths.html">the family member</a> of a person who died from COVID-19, who gives a moving account for a story about the virus’s effects on young adults.</p>
<p>News is about people, so it makes sense to highlight real-life stories. Viewers and readers relate <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/makes-good-story/good-stories-prove-relevance-audience">more to personal tales than they do to dry statistics</a>.</p>
<p>But one person’s experience is, well, one person’s experience. <a href="https://www.routledge.com/Exemplification-in-Communication-the-influence-of-Case-Reports-on-the-Perception/Zillmann-Brosius/p/book/9780805828115">Media studies research</a> suggests readers should not be unduly swayed by one person’s tale of woe – or joy – because examples don’t necessarily represent the whole. </p>
<h2>Harrowing, memorable and incomplete</h2>
<p>Six million Americans have <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/coronavirus-us-cases.html">contracted the coronavirus</a>, experiencing radically differing symptoms, illnesses and outcomes. So terrifying individual tales in a news story can’t tell people all they need to know.</p>
<p>For example, National Public Radio recently did a piece on <a href="https://www.npr.org/transcripts/900710151">people recovering very slowly from the coronavirus</a>. The gut-wrenching story told first-person accounts of two women who continue to suffer months after getting the virus. </p>
<p>The interview was harrowing – enough to scare one into wearing a mask at all times – and memorable. But most people will not become COVID-19 “<a href="https://theconversation.com/im-a-covid-19-long-hauler-and-an-epidemiologist-heres-how-it-feels-when-symptoms-last-for-months-143676">long haulers</a>.” Evidence suggests it takes <a href="https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#2">usually two weeks</a> to recover from mild cases and six weeks from serious cases. </p>
<p>While scientists don’t yet fully understand COVID-19, the <a href="https://www.webmd.com/lung/covid-recovery-overview#1">overall recovery rate</a> from the virus is between 97% and 99.75%. </p>
<p>NPR included information on typical illness length in its story on COVID-19 long haulers. But the two women’s horrific accounts are what many listeners will likely recall – and tell others about.</p>
<p>Another exemplification that could lead people to misunderstand pandemic risk is the story of <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2020/07/12/south-carolina-reports-first-coronavirus-death-child-under-5/5423730002/">the first child under age 5</a> to die from the virus, in South Carolina. Distributed nationally by the Associated Press, this piece ran in local papers across the U.S. It would naturally have parents concerned.</p>
<p>Yet <a href="https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/covid-data/investigations-discovery/hospitalization-death-by-age.html">the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention</a> says children so young are nine times less likely to die from COVID-19 than young adults and 270 times less likely than people in their 50s. </p>
<p>This information was not included in the story, potentially skewing parents’ thinking when it comes to decisions about everything from play dates to school attendance.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A very young child is nasal swabbed for coronavirus by a health professional in a mask and face shield" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=435&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355578/original/file-20200831-18-hq5ltd.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Young children are extremely unlikely to die from COVID-19.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/the-numbers-are-low-until-its-your-child-the-coronavirus-can-be-deadly-for-children-too/2020/04/21/0f5ab28a-83e9-11ea-ae26-989cfce1c7c7_story.html">AP Photo/Elaine Thompson</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Anecdotal evidence is…anecdotal</h2>
<p>This problem goes beyond coronavirus coverage. </p>
<p>Another common tactic in the news business is the “anecdotal lead” – the short story that starts a news article or TV news broadcast, meant to grab attention. For example, <a href="https://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2020/06/01/santa-monica-owner-defends-his-store-with-guns-amid-looting/">one widely reported anecdote</a> during the anti-racism protests following the police death of George Floyd was a store owner in Santa Monica, California, who protected his liquor store from looting in June by standing out front with an assault rifle.</p>
<p>Be wary of such opening anecdotes. </p>
<p>The Santa Monica snapshot, while true, is not indicative of how <a href="https://theconversation.com/federal-agents-sent-to-kenosha-but-history-shows-militarized-policing-in-cities-can-escalate-violence-and-trigger-conflict-143579">unrest across the nation</a> is playing out. Most protests are <a href="https://theconversation.com/black-lives-matter-movement-uses-creative-tactics-to-confront-systemic-racism-143273">peaceful</a>, and when looting breaks out business owners generally leave <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/at-george-floyd-protests-police-and-protesters-try-to-stop-looting-11591377543">armed defense to the police</a>. Some press charges against those who damage their property. Other small business owners have <a href="https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/minneapolis-businesswoman-stands-protesters-even-after-her-store-burned-down-n1226731">fed, protected and joined peaceful protesters</a>.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Chef Oji Abbot sits outside his restaurant and another Black-owned business, both of which feature anti-racism messaging" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/355580/original/file-20200831-25-rb6c5d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Many small business owners, like Oji Abbott of Washington, D.C., supported recent anti-racism protests.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/oji-abbott-chef-o-sits-in-front-of-his-restaurant-oohhs-and-news-photo/1221108523?adppopup=true">Brendan Smialowski / AFP via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>All those stories are told in the media, too. Yet Brian Dunning, <a href="https://skeptoid.com/">executive director of Skeptoid Media</a>, which produces a podcast dedicated to debunking bad science, said the opening anecdote is usually what readers and viewers remember from a news story – not so much the bigger picture it is supposed to convey. </p>
<p>The human brain is “hard-wired to think anecdotally,” <a href="http://aejmc.org/events/sanfrancisco20/keynote/">said Dunning in a recent interview</a> with a group of journalism educators.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/how-memories-are-formed-and-retrieved-by-the-brain-revealed-in-a-new-study-125361">Science backs this up</a>. Research into cognitive processing finds that people consume information constantly, and their brains eventually get so full that only a few scant details can be recalled. </p>
<p>“So most news story content is never adequately processed and quickly forgotten,” write Stanely J. Baran and Dennis K. Davis in a primer on <a href="https://global.oup.com/ushe/product/mass-communication-theory-9780190942793">mass communication</a>. “Even when we do make a more conscious effort to learn from news, we often lack the information necessary to make in-depth interpretations of content.”</p>
<h2>The big pandemic puzzle</h2>
<p>Despite the foibles of human memory, journalists still gravitate toward “the intriguing case report” and the “exemplar-laden account,” explain researchers Dolf Zillman and Hans Bernrd Brosius in their 2000 book “<a href="https://www.routledge.com/Exemplification-in-Communication-the-influence-of-Case-Reports-on-the-Perception/Zillmann-Brosius/p/book/9780805828115">Exemplification in Communication</a>.” </p>
<p>There’s a simple reason: It sells.</p>
<p>“Journalism dedicated to unexemplified, abstract accounts of phenomena, no matter how reliable and effectively informative, has rarely, if ever, been considered a winning formula,” say Zillman and Brosius.</p>
<p>[<em>Deep knowledge, daily.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=deepknowledge">Sign up for The Conversation’s newsletter</a>.]</p>
<p>The real-person story is not useless. It can help people understand today’s complicated world of deadly pandemics, civil unrest and economic devastation. </p>
<p>But examples are only part of a bigger picture that may well be abstract, nuanced and ever-changing. </p>
<p>The wise news consumer will consider each example as just one piece of the pandemic puzzle as they make daily decisions to keep themselves healthy and their families safe.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144261/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Thomas J. Hrach does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Journalists use real people’s stories to ‘humanize’ the news. But these tales – whether harrowing or heartwarming – can be misleading about the pandemic’s greatest threats.Thomas J. Hrach, Associate Professor, Department of Journalism and Strategic Media, University of MemphisLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1443032020-08-13T15:20:22Z2020-08-13T15:20:22ZChasing dinghies: media must remember asylum seekers are human beings, not just a good story<p>The reports were compelling. Broadcasters tracking flimsy-looking dinghies crammed with people, with the reporters so close that they could actually shout questions to those negotiating the hazardous traffic of the English Channel.</p>
<p>Reports by the BBC and Sky News have been condemned by opposition MPs and campaigners as <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/11/bbc-and-sky-accused-of-dehumanising-people-trying-to-cross-channel">grotesque and voyeuristic</a>. In one live report, a boat containing a BBC Breakfast crew got worryingly close to a dinghy, where those travelling in it were bailing out water with a plastic container. Soon after, a Sky News reporter pulled alongside another overcrowded craft to shout questions. </p>
<p>The satirical site Newsthump <a href="https://newsthump.com/2020/08/11/bbc-and-sky-news-neck-and-neck-in-race-to-see-who-will-be-first-to-film-a-dinghy-actually-sinking/">summed up the situation with the headline</a>: BBC and Sky neck and neck in race to see who will be first to film a boat actually sinking.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1292706269774651392"}"></div></p>
<p>Coverage of asylum-seekers and migration is fraught and often criticised. But surrounding these reports are two issues: whether this story should be reported now and, if so, what the role of a journalist should be.</p>
<p>Most objecting to the story’s coverage see it as inspired by remarks by the former UKIP leader Nigel Farage. He spoke of a “shocking invasion” on the Kent coast – remarks <a href="https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-kent-beach-invasion-video-anti-migrant-immigration-a9658246.html">promptly condemned</a> by anti-racism campaigners. The media’s response is that the Home Office’s request for help from defence chiefs – as well as the appointment of a “clandestine threat commander” – means it is an urgent and important news story.</p>
<p>But this reliance by journalists on politicians for sources – as colleagues at City University of London and I found when <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1748048520913230?casa_token=8YWLHCkxnjcAAAAA%3AJi3HXJqgsAlW8y0k1XjHPMilsGBtQzy75TxNdSHS9MAIvT8t6MyYZFChkv2sa-Qs7ndCMid1d8BH">carrying out a recent study</a> on the way the UK media reports asylum-seeking – means that the line political elites adopt often cascades down to the public through the media and helps shape opinion. </p>
<p>As Refugee Action tweeted, the focus should be on effective solutions rather than hostile rhetoric, with politicians saying little about safe and legal routes for refugees or a resettlement programme.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1293176735328907268"}"></div></p>
<h2>Onlooker or participant?</h2>
<p>But if we accept this is a story that should be covered, what is the role of the reporter? Many on social media were angry that the reporters in their boats did not rescue those who appeared to be in difficulty.</p>
<p>First, as a senior figure from a media organisation told me, if those in the boats had been in immediate peril there’s no question of what would have happened: they would have helped. <a href="https://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/unclos_e.pdf">Maritime law dictates</a> a ship’s master must help a vessel in distress as well. But what if the danger is not immediately apparent?</p>
<p>Traditional journalistic norms say the reporter bears witness to, rather than participates in, events. But coverage of humanitarian stories has always been a fraught exception where the lines are frequently blurred.</p>
<p>One of the most famous cases was <a href="http://100photos.time.com/photos/kevin-carter-starving-child-vulture">Kevin Carter’s photograph</a> of a little girl with a vulture lurking nearby during the 1993 Sudan famine. Carter waited for 20 minutes to see if the vulture would spread its wings, giving him a better image. He eventually chased it away, leaving the girl to struggle to a nearby feeding centre. After the image appeared, Carter was both praised for the power of the photograph and condemned for not rescuing the girl.</p>
<p>In her book on Compassion Fatigue: How the Media Sell Disease, Famine, War and Death, <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780203900352">Susan D Moeller commented</a>: “Being close enough to photograph the starving child meant being close enough to help. The responsibility to bear witness does not automatically outweigh the responsibility to get involved.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Starving Sudanese child with vulture in background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=383&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/352702/original/file-20200813-16-9l9su0.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=482&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Voyeuristic? Kevin Carter’s iconic famine photograph.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Kevin Carter via Wikipedia</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Not long after Carter’s photograph, norms of distance were being challenged by people such as the BBC’s former war correspondent Martin Bell, <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/095647489700800102?casa_token=OHjR6F0nJO4AAAAA:9BsV9EscEFD4jHeyG3PWuRXapMu4RFBl74OaS10uzwyLtazqR8PJB2oVfhSAjJUiiX8MNgWVqFti">who said</a> he could no longer endure what he called “bystander journalism” and instead argued in favour of a “journalism of attachment”, defined as an approach “that will not stand neutrally between good and evil, right and wrong, victim and oppressor”.</p>
<h2>Necessary distancing</h2>
<p>But how far should journalistic involvement go? When the 2010 Haiti earthquake happened, viewers watched the CNN presenter Anderson Cooper grab a bloodied boy and drag him to safety from a mob, while his reporter colleague, Dr Sanjay Gupta, performed brain surgery on a 15-year-old girl and single-handedly staffed a field hospital overnight.</p>
<p>The website Gawker <a href="https://gawker.com/5451459/anderson-cooper-saves-boy-as-cnns-haiti-coverage-reaches-strange-apotheosis">described this</a> as a “strange apotheosis” in coverage, breaching the news/newsmaker barrier, with the writer Adrian Chen saying that Cooper and Gupta were effectively being Clark Kent and Superman at the same time. “At what point,” he mused, “does this go from ‘CNN’s Excellent Haiti Coverage’ to ‘CNN’s Excellent Haiti Adventure?’”</p>
<p>But journalism that over-invests in emotion can equally fail to show the full picture – distance can be necessary in migration stories which have complex and overlapping narratives. The Ethical Journalism Network’s <a href="https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/resources/infographics/ethical-guidelines-on-migration-reporting">five-point plan</a> on migration reporting is key. It warns against over-simplification, acting independently from narratives that stem from politics or emotion and ensuring migrant voices are heard. </p>
<p>The IFRC’s <a href="https://media.ifrc.org/ifrc/who-we-are/the-movement/code-of-conduct/">Code of Conduct</a> for covering humanitarian disasters also states that disaster victims should be treated as “dignified human beings not hopeless objects”.</p>
<p>For even those with the best of intentions can end up making the situation worse. The 2017 documentary <a href="https://www.anothernewsstory.com/">Another News Story</a> directed by Orban Wallace about the Syrian refugee crisis should be required watching for anyone wanting to cover asylum issues. Wallace turns the cameras on the hacks themselves, who often act honourably. But it’s hard not to cringe when people stumble off a raft onto a Greek island only to have a camera shoved in their faces before being offered food or water.</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/PDZJ6zACCpY?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
</figure>
<p>Which brings us back to the coverage of small boats in the channel. Despite the pile-on on the individual journalists on Twitter, if you actually listen to what they say in their broadcasts, they are clear about the risks people are taking, and the perils those in the dinghies face. They also state that they have alerted coastguards to ensure rescue is possible.</p>
<p>But the choice to chase the dinghies live on air reduces the reporting to a spectacle, with the visuals overwhelming any carefully chosen words. It’s not that the story shouldn’t be covered, or that those making the journey to the UK shouldn’t be interviewed – but tone and feel are crucial. Otherwise, any complexity or examination of the politicians’ rhetoric gets sunk in the rush for the first interview from an overcrowded boat.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/144303/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Glenda Cooper does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Important news coverage or voyeurism disguised as journalism? It’s complicated.Glenda Cooper, Senior Lecturer in Journalism, City, University of LondonLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1414862020-07-01T14:19:26Z2020-07-01T14:19:26ZThe media often conflates malicious criticism with genuine critique: why it shouldn’t<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/344311/original/file-20200626-104538-15dm0fs.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">GEORGES GOBET/AFP via Getty Images</span></span></figcaption></figure><p><strong><em>This is an edited extract from <a href="http://witspress.co.za/catalogue/tell-our-story/">Tell Our Story: Multiplying Voices in the News Media</a> by Dale McKinley and Julie Reid.</em></strong></p>
<hr>
<p>“If journalism is a force of immense influence – and I think it is, and should be – then it surely deserves scrutiny.” These are the words of Alan Rusbridger, former editor-in-chief of <em>The Guardian</em> in London.</p>
<p>News media sector representatives, journalists and editors often respond to criticism of the press with assertions that the freedom and independence of the news media must be protected at all costs. This is often an almost automatic knee-jerk reaction. For many, the freedom of the press is an infallible sacred cow. This line of argument is sometimes well placed. But at other times it is decidedly manipulative and unhelpful.</p>
<p>There is no question that the world’s investigative news media suffers significant <a href="https://www.indexoncensorship.org/targeting-the-messenger-investigative-journalists-under-extreme-pressure/">strain</a>. This results, in part, from the difficulties of financial sustainability and the crisis of credibility associated with campaigns that set out to delegitimise the media as well as fake news. </p>
<p>But it is also becoming increasingly more dangerous to be a journalist, especially for women. Direct <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/dec/05/threat-journalists-highest-level-10-years-report">threats</a> to journalists are on the increase across the world. This includes assassinations, death threats and intimidation, arrests and detention, or online trolling. </p>
<p>In addition, political and governmental interference in the editorial independence of news outlets, politically connected media ownership and regulatory restrictions on freedom of expression and access to information are still prevalent in many countries. </p>
<p>It’s therefore easy to understand why journalists and media professionals automatically take up defensive positions when confronted with criticism. They feel as though they are under attack. And they are. </p>
<p>But too often genuine critique or evidence-based scrutiny of the news media’s performance by media analysts is unreasonably equated with the tack of the sinister forces who intend to do media workers serious harm. </p>
<p>The two cannot simply be equated. </p>
<h2>Differentiating criticism</h2>
<p>The rantings of a crooked politician who dismisses the news media’s reportage as <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-real-news-on-fake-news-politicians-use-it-to-discredit-media-and-journalists-need-to-fight-back-123907">fake news</a> and calls for draconian media regulations to conceal his own corruption is one thing. The critique and criticisms of media analysts, but more especially of ordinary citizens, whose only request is that the news media works better for them, is an entirely different matter. And ought to be respected. </p>
<p>Threats against the freedom of the press may be serious. But they are not the same thing as genuine and constructive criticism that aims to contribute to a more democratised media sphere, and one that operates to serve its audience better. </p>
<p>These two factors ought to be considered separately. </p>
<p>The loud defence of the journalistic ideal prompts the question: independent from what and from whom? Surely not from the equally important <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327728JMME1504_5">journalistic ideals</a> of fairness, balance and impartiality?</p>
<p>And surely not from those whom the mainstream press professes to ‘serve’: the mediated public, the media audience and ordinary citizens?</p>
<p>The line of argument adopted by news practitioners, infused with connotations that the press ought to remain beyond reproach and untouchable in order to protect media freedom, has often proven unhelpful. This cop-out discoursal manoeuvre is irrational and unjustifiable. It is also an injustice to the billions of people who are media users, many of whom have legitimate grievances with the press. </p>
<p>The freedom of the press is important, and of course it must be protected. But the freedom of everybody else and of ordinary citizens is also important. It too should be taken into consideration.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-journalists-in-south-africa-should-do-some-self-reflection-105056">Why journalists in South Africa should do some self-reflection</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Freedom of expression debates that focus solely on the freedom of expression rights of media workers can be a hindrance when they effectively block conversations about the freedom of expression and representation rights of media users and citizens. The right of freedom of expression of the press is traditionally regarded as universally so precious that any ‘meddling’ in content – despite the inherently problematic nature of that content – is widely regarded as patently wrong. </p>
<p>This simplistic and naive view relegates the notion of media freedom to the role of a beating stick to dissuade anyone from suggesting that news media content needs to improve or change. It immediately disables legitimate debate and introspection on the part of the media sector. The result is that opportunities to explore new ways of creating media content that speaks to, for and about ordinary media users is dismissed. </p>
<p>But contrary to the way in which it has been mythologised, the freedom of the press is not a magic wand that imbues the news media with the status of an untouchable golden calf. The press can be critiqued without its rights being infringed upon, just like anything else.</p>
<p>For these reasons, among others, I have <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02500167.2017.1337648">argued elsewhere</a> for a substantial revision of the popular way in which we think of the notion of media freedom.</p>
<p>Our definition of media and press freedom needs to change because of the current exclusionary nature of the popular understandings of these terms. Much of the debate on media accountability has centred on the tension that this causes between journalistic autonomy and the public’s need for a <a href="https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327728JMME1504_5">responsible press</a>.</p>
<p>But, if we were to understand media freedom differently, this relationship may involve less tension and more balance.</p>
<p><em><a href="http://witspress.co.za/catalogue/tell-our-story/">Tell Our Story: Multiplying Voices in the News Media</a>, authored by Julie Reid and Dale T McKinley, is published by <a href="http://witspress.co.za">Wits University Press</a>.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/141486/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Julie Reid has received funding from the Open Society Foundation for South Africa, and the Women in Research Fund, awarded by the University of South Africa. She is affiliated with the Media Policy and Democracy Project. </span></em></p>The freedom of the press is important, and of course it must be protected. But the freedom of everybody else and of ordinary citizens is also important.Julie Reid, Associate professor, University of South AfricaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1397042020-06-23T12:20:51Z2020-06-23T12:20:51ZDoes coronavirus aid to news outlets undermine journalistic credibility?<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343006/original/file-20200619-43196-i62y4e.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=41%2C98%2C5335%2C3523&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">More than two dozen newsrooms have shut down and stopped the presses during the pandemic.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/conveyor-belt-with-newspapers-in-a-printery-royalty-free-image/648822915?adppopup=true"> Tom Werner/Getty</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The news business, like every other, is struggling amid the coronavirus pandemic. The economic crisis has forced more than two dozen small-town <a href="https://www.poynter.org/locally/2020/the-coronavirus-has-closed-more-than-25-local-newsrooms-across-america-and-counting/">newsrooms to shut down</a> and has accelerated media job losses – including hundreds of layoffs at outlets as varied as Condé Nast, BuzzFeed, Vice, The Economist, and virtually every newspaper chain. </p>
<p>As a result, publishers have been among those in line to apply for loans from the <a href="https://www.sba.gov/funding-programs/loans/paycheck-protection-program-ppp">Paycheck Protection Program</a>, an emergency funding package administered by the federal Small Business Administration. </p>
<p>News organizations have received millions in coronavirus stimulus aid. The <a href="https://www.cpb.org/pressroom/CPB-Announces-Distribution-Plan-CARES-Act-Funds">Corporation for Public Broadcasting received US$75 million</a> from the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act), which it planned to distribute to public media across the country. The <a href="https://www.seattletimes.com/business/local-business/seattle-times-co-gets-nearly-10-million-in-federal-coronavirus-aid-funds/">Seattle Times received $10 million</a>. Axios, a well-respected inside-the-Beltway political news outlet, <a href="https://www.editorandpublisher.com/news/the-ppp-divide-while-venture-backed-publishers-get-ppp-loans-many-bootstrapped-publishers-havent/">received $4.8 million</a>. The list goes on and includes The Conversation, which received $367,000.</p>
<p>But of course, journalism isn’t just any other business. It comes with a <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/#:%7E:text=Congress%20shall%20make%20no%20law,for%20a%20redress%20of%20grievances.">First Amendment</a> culture that situates the press as, among other things, an <a href="https://www.mlive.com/opinion/2018/08/a_free_press.html">independent government watchdog</a>, an institution that’s supposed to keep its distance from other power centers. </p>
<p>Does taking government money mean editors, broadcasters and publishers owe the government something? Do these grants create a conflict of interest in an industry whose credibility rests on its independence?</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343007/original/file-20200619-43229-1wu6bxg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Does taking money from the government compromise journalists?</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/paycheck-protection-program-royalty-free-image/1221703830?adppopup=true">Kameleon007/Getty</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Concern is justified</h2>
<p>In a Wall Street Journal story about the Paycheck Protection Program, <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/many-newspapers-want-coronavirus-stimulus-four-out-of-five-cant-get-it-11587987059">an executive at Gannett Co.</a>, the country’s largest newspaper chain, with 261 daily papers, was quoted as saying, “We are always open to considering ways to sustain journalism. However, we would never allow ourselves to be perceived as dependent on or influenced by government funding.” Parent companies such as Gannett, which own multiple news outlets across the country, are presently not eligible for PPP aid. But the concern for independence continues to be a driving one at such companies. </p>
<p>Soon after receiving PPP money, <a href="https://www.axios.com/axios-%09returns-ppp-loan-a4595591-e5fc-41a6-ba00-cc7602cc50d6.html">Axios decided to return it</a>, saying “the program has become divisive, turning into a public debate about the worthiness of specific industries or companies,” and that an alternative source of capital for Axios had emerged.</p>
<p>Journalism professionals and supporters are right to be concerned about the conflict-of-interest questions raised by PPP support. In journalism, credibility is paramount: If audiences no longer see journalists as reliable sources of independent news, the whole enterprise is questioned. </p>
<p>This is why <a href="https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/213901/corporate-media-and-the-threat-to-democracy-by-robert-w-mcchesney/">corporate media ownership is a serious ethical concern</a> – parent companies (i.e., Walt Disney) <a href="https://ajrarchive.org/Article.asp?id=237">are tempted to harness their media outlets (i.e., ABC News) to promote other corporate products</a> (i.e., books, movies and music from Disney-owned publishers, studios and record labels).</p>
<p>The concern to protect credibility is also why individual <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp">journalists routinely refrain from being active in issues they cover, such as politics</a>. Journalistic credibility also is protected in part by keeping an arms-length relationship with any person or group, including government, that might have an interest in shaping the news or try to leverage favorable treatment with access, junkets, scoops – or stimulus aid.</p>
<p>But as <a href="https://www.bellisario.psu.edu/people/individual/patrick-lee-plaisance">a former journalist</a> and a <a href="https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/media-ethics/book239341">media ethics scholar</a> who has deeply explored such ethical dilemmas, I suggest that PPP aid need not undermine journalistic credibility.</p>
<h2>Keep the faith</h2>
<p>In the news business, conflicts of interest have historically been taken quite seriously, since they can undermine the very heart of the enterprise: journalistic credibility. </p>
<p>Countless conflict-of-interest policies, both in the public and private sector, are intended to protect journalistic autonomy and credibility in varying ways – from explicit requirements to avoid conflicts, to requirements to at least disclose them. </p>
<p>Since 1896, when New York Times owner Adolph S. Ochs declared his paper would report the news “<a href="https://books.google.com/books/about/Without_Fear_Or_Favor.html?id=g6Y8AAAACAAJ">without fear or favor</a>,” most reporters, editors, broadcasters and publishers have been keenly aware that they can lose the faith of their audiences if their news reports are perceived as driven by special interests. </p>
<p>Almost all mainstream news organizations have clear conflict-of-interest guidelines. The newsroom at most outlets doesn’t talk to the advertising department – a divide long considered a “<a href="https://archives.cjr.org/the_audit/bloomberg_news_and_the_problem.php">church and state</a>” separation to ensure advertisers don’t get special news treatment. <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethics-papers-politics.asp">Politics reporters are not allowed to participate</a> in political events or have political bumper stickers on their cars.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=399&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/343008/original/file-20200619-43191-18fcxyt.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=502&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">This is not likely to be a journalist’s car.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/car-covered-in-democratic-party-candidate-bumper-sticker-news-photo/1081425586?adppopup=true">Joseph Prezioso//AFP via Getty Image</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Managing conflicts</h2>
<p>Despite all this professional rhetoric, journalistic independence has regularly been called into question and undermined. Perceived conflicts such as corporate ownership, coddling of advertisers, and favoritism regularly crop up, and special interests influence news coverage in all kinds of ways. </p>
<p>The Washington Post has been criticized for the apparent conflict posed by its sale to Amazon executive Jeff Bezos. <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/11/business/media/washington-post-jeff-bezos.html">Bezos has insisted on a hands-off approach</a> to the newsroom, and while <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2018/12/04/treasury-suggests-review-postal-rates-not-just-amazon/">Amazon-related Post stories often disclose Bezos’ ownership</a>, the bigger concern is the unwritten culture created by the arrangement. <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/washington-post-anonymous-amazon-bezos_n_5c056c68e4b07aec575158d6">Post journalists</a> may be less inclined to see Amazon practices as newsworthy because of Bezos’ largesse.</p>
<p>Getting aid from the federal government to help stay in business ought to concern any self-respecting journalist. But forgoing the stimulus altogether is not the only, nor even the best, option. </p>
<p>Many conflicts can be managed responsibly. While a concern on its face, the ethical question posed by receiving PPP money from the federal Small Business Administration is not the same as that posed by revenue from advertisers who might want to coerce friendly news coverage.</p>
<p>Regarding the latter, such concerns about conflicts of interest are troubling precisely because they tend to pose ongoing threats to journalistic independence: run a story anytime in the future that displeases the company, and they will pull their advertising or, at public media outlets, their sponsorship.</p>
<h2>What’s the threat?</h2>
<p>The case of PPP aid is both much more diffuse and a one-off occurrence: It is difficult to discern the news “agenda” that such a sprawling government bureaucracy – one intended as more of an administrative body than a policymaking office – might attach to a one-time disbursement of aid. </p>
<p>And what is the threat to journalistic independence posed once the money is disbursed? </p>
<p>Short of a blatant refund demand after an unflattering story about PPP administrator the Small Business Administration, which seems unlikely, there would be little leverage available to the SBA such as that with ongoing advertising contracts. A local auto dealership can pull its advertising out of punitive pique, and that would be the end of the matter; a federal agency attempting to do so would run squarely into strong First Amendment prohibitions.</p>
<p>What journalistic recipients of PPP money can and should do is to be fully <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08900520701315855">transparent</a> to audiences. Publishers should disclose their motive for applying to the program and how the money is spent. They should invite public discussion of any conflict-of-interest concerns, and announce steps in case a conflict involving news coverage arises (such as promises to include a disclosure in stories involving the SBA).</p>
<p>Perceived, as well as actual, threats to journalistic independence should never be taken lightly. But the apparent conflict of interest posed by PPP aid to newsrooms can be managed by transparency, rather than outright avoidance.</p>
<p><em>This story has been updated to state the proper source of the government funds – the CARES Act – given to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting.</em></p>
<p><em>The Conversation has received funds from the Paycheck Protection Program.</em></p>
<p>[<em>You’re smart and curious about the world. So are The Conversation’s authors and editors.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/weekly-highlights-61?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=weeklysmart">You can get our highlights each weekend</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/139704/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Patrick Lee Plaisance does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Does taking government money mean journalists owe the government something? A media ethics scholar examines the ethical questions about news organizations getting government help during the pandemic.Patrick Lee Plaisance, Don W. Davis Professor of Ethics, Penn StateLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.