tag:theconversation.com,2011:/uk/topics/journalism-ethics-11236/articles
Journalism ethics – The Conversation
2023-11-21T19:06:50Z
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/214639
2023-11-21T19:06:50Z
2023-11-21T19:06:50Z
The Walkley awards were begun by a prominent oil baron. How do we reconcile their history and future?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/560660/original/file-20231121-19-yfji0a.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=447%2C201%2C1554%2C915&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">William Gaston Walkley addressing guests at the opening of the Birkenhead terminal, 1950. </span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-147097306/view">Ampol and Caltex photograph collection/Trove</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In May this year, Belinda Noble, former journalist and the founder of Comms Declare, an organisation representing media professionals who won’t promote the expansion of fossil fuels, <a href="https://mumbrella.com.au/the-awkward-snub-of-climate-change-by-ampol-sponsored-walkley-awards-788011">wrote on Ampol’s sponsorship</a> of the nation’s premier journalism prizes, the Walkley Awards.</p>
<p>Three months later, Walkley Award-winning cartoonist Jon Kudelka <a href="https://www.kudelka.com.au/2023/08/why-im-not-entering-the-walkleys-this-year/">announced</a> he would boycott the 2023 Walkleys because of this sponsorship. He was soon joined by scores of other cartoonists, who <a href="https://globalvoices.org/2023/09/07/australian-cartoonists-boycott-media-awards-over-fossil-fuel-censorship/">linked the issue</a> to the omission of a dedicated award for climate-focused journalism. </p>
<p>The controversies for the 2023 awards didn’t end there. On September 2, journalist Osman Faruqi wrote about the <a href="https://www.smh.com.au/national/the-racist-past-of-the-oil-baron-who-set-up-australia-s-top-journalism-award-20230901-p5e18i.html">racist views expressed</a> by the founder of the awards, oil baron Sir William (Bill) Walkley. The Walkley Foundation issued an <a href="https://www.walkleys.com/a-statement-from-the-walkley-foundation/">apology</a> for these views that day.</p>
<p>This week, the winners of the 67th Walkleys will be announced, so it is timely to discuss how we reconcile our present attitudes and knowledge with historical realities – and how resistant is our media to being seduced by powerful interests.</p>
<h2>A murky history</h2>
<p>The first Walkleys were awarded in 1956, but Bill Walkley’s seduction of the media began a few years beforehand. As managing director of Ampol, in 1953 he chartered a plane to take reporters to Rough Range in Western Australia to witness the spudding of Australia’s first oil well. </p>
<p>Staff writers published in The Age: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>The prospects for Australia – if the strike proves part of a big field – are limitless. The discovery of oil could mean as much to 20th century Australians as the introduction of Merino sheep meant to our great-grandparents.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Historian and former journalist John Hurst wrote of the trip: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>the food was first class, there was plenty of grog […] and Walkley was his usual affable self and always accessible. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Reporters described the land in the language of the settler as “a lonely expanse carpeted with spiky spinifex, salt-bush and stunted scrub”:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Kangaroos, emus, flocks of goats and a few wandering, scraggy sheep are the only audience of man’s activity. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>The First Australians were invisible. Respect for their ownership of the land, even for their very existence, was entirely absent.</p>
<p>This kind of duchessing of the media by the oil industry lasted for years. From the 1950s to the 1980s, among the most sought-after junkets in Australian journalism were the Shell Tours, conducted in association with the Royal Agricultural Societies in NSW and Victoria to brief journalists on rural affairs.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=547&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/560267/original/file-20231119-31-tp8p0l.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">From left to right, Charles Billings, William G. Walkley, Sir George Wales and an unknown man outside the terminal office during the opening of the Birkenhead terminal, 1950.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-147098002/view">Ampol and Caltex photograph collection/Trove</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Some reporting got done and some evocative photographs taken, but the companies that sponsored these trips and the journalists who went on them did so in a cultural climate where certain values were dominant and others were entirely absent.</p>
<p>In this climate, figures like Walkley were lionised as people whose views about the nation’s future should be heard. In 1961, Walkley and six other leaders of business, commerce and industry were invited by the Sydney Morning Herald to write on the theme “if I ran this country”.</p>
<p>Walkley argued Australia was underpopulated and underdeveloped. In accord with the conventional attitudes (and the White Australia Policy) prevailing in 1961, Walkley declared: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Today Australians are but a drop of white in a sea of colour that teems with more than 1,200 million land-hungry Asiatics.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>This language, just as the invisibility of the Aboriginal people at Rough Ridge, is repugnant to us though unremarkable at the time. </p>
<p>Added to those considerations now is the impact on the climate of our use of fossil fuels – ignored at the time, despite prophetic scientific warnings.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/a-question-of-ethics-journalists-and-climate-change-18395">A question of ethics: journalists and climate change</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<h2>Facing history and future</h2>
<p>So how do we reconcile our present attitudes and knowledge with these historical realities?</p>
<p>Concerning Walkley’s racist attitudes, we may begin with the moral absolute that racism is always wrong, and condemn him on that ground. But his culpability, although not absolved, is mitigated by the cultural climate in which he wrote.</p>
<p>Removing his name from the awards would leave existing recipients in possession of awards devalued by association, which would be ahistorical and grossly unfair. Frank disclosure, faithful recording of history, and the apology made by the Walkley Foundation are sufficient.</p>
<p>But climate change is a contemporary, not historical, problem to which Ampol contributes.</p>
<p>Typically under sponsorship arrangements, corporations are purchasing the goodwill of the media so if the need arises they will get the benefit of any doubt. This transactional element is harder to ignore. </p>
<p>The junket to Rough Ridge resulted in highly positive publicity for Ampol and Walkley. Certainly it reported an important development in Australia’s history – but the enthusiastic tone of celebration was generated by the goodwill resulting from the treatment the journalists received. Today there is a greater awareness among journalists of these dynamics but it is still hard to bite the hand that feeds.</p>
<p>There is a precedent for disconnecting journalism from fossil fuel revenue. Guardian Australia, whose journalists qualify for Walkley awards, has made a policy decision <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/help/insideguardian/2020/jan/29/why-the-guardian-will-no-longer-accept-fossil-fuel-advertising">not to accept fossil fuel advertising</a>. </p>
<p>Weakened by the impact of the internet on advertising revenue and of social media on information dissemination, the media and the profession of journalism on which they rely are not in a strong financial position to resist sponsorship. The ethical question for the Walkley Foundation is whether it is prepared to allow Ampol to get whatever benefit the company perceives comes its way from this sponsorship.</p>
<p>It comes down to principle, as Guardian Australia has demonstrated. </p>
<p>And if the Walkley Foundation were to introduce an award for climate-focused journalism, how would that sit with sponsorship from an oil company?</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/global-journalism-needs-global-ethics-62963">Global journalism needs global ethics</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214639/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Dr Jennifer Martin wrote her PhD on the role of emotion and virtues in journalism in award winning journalism, based upon a selection of Walkley Award winning feature articles. In 2018 and 2019 she was part of a Deakin University team that received funding from the Walkley Foundation to develop a pilot for the Walkley Digital Archive. </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>
How can we reconcile our present attitudes and knowledge with historical realities – and how resistant our is media to being seduced by powerful interests?
Denis Muller, Senior Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
Jennifer Martin, Senior Lecturer, Communication at Deakin University Australia., Deakin University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/215626
2023-10-16T16:35:09Z
2023-10-16T16:35:09Z
Terrorist vs. militant: The complicated language of reporting atrocities in Israel-Hamas war
<iframe style="width: 100%; height: 100px; border: none; position: relative; z-index: 1;" allowtransparency="" allow="clipboard-read; clipboard-write" src="https://narrations.ad-auris.com/widget/the-conversation-canada/terrorist-vs-militant-the-complicated-language-of-reporting-atrocities-in-israel-hamas-war" width="100%" height="400"></iframe>
<p>By any definition of <em>terror</em>, the word covers killing children in their homes and taking concert-goers hostage to further a political cause. So why, even after the mass killings and kidnappings in Israel on Oct. 7, do major news organizations <a href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2023/10/13/israel-hamas-war-jewish-board-of-deputies-writes-bbc/">resist multiplying calls</a> <a href="https://theconversation.com/hamas-what-you-need-to-know-about-the-group-that-attacked-israel-215288">to describe Hamas</a> as a <em>terrorist</em> organization?</p>
<p>Preliminary phrase searches through <a href="https://about.proquest.com/en/products-services/globalnewsstream/">ProQuest Global Newstream</a> in the days following Oct. 7 suggest that news organizations with conservative leanings (such as <em>The Telegraph</em> and <em>The Australian</em>) are most likely to use <em>terrorist</em> adjacent to the name Hamas. Wire services, public broadcasters and national news brands with broad readerships reach more diligently for neutral terms. They may call Hamas a <em>militia</em> and use <em>killings</em> or <em>attacks</em> where others say <em>atrocity</em> or <em>slaughter</em>.</p>
<p>For its part, the <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/entertainment-arts-67076341.amp">BBC responded to fierce pressure</a> from politicians and Jewish leaders by claiming the high ground of professional best practice and autonomy, stating: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>“The BBC is an editorially independent broadcaster whose job is to explain precisely what is happening ‘on the ground’ so our audiences can make their own judgment.”</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The Canadian Press <a href="https://www.thecanadianpress.com/about/our-team-values/our-news-principles/">advises journalists to avoid</a> “labelling one side the terrorists, which makes the other side automatically the good guys.” </p>
<p>It points out that language affects perceptions (“‘One person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter,’ as the saying goes”) and that, in addition to being neutral, “terms such as bombers, gunmen and killers also offer the advantage of being more specific.”</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/indias-accusation-of-terrorism-is-a-ploy-to-hide-its-own-human-rights-abuses-214660">India's accusation of 'terrorism' is a ploy to hide its own human rights abuses</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>The opposing case for more laden terms is pressed by politicians and advocates who likely echo constituents’ visceral reactions. To those who mourn or rage in violent times, neutral language may seem performative at best — or even cruel. On both sides of the Gaza-Israel <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2023/10/10/how-hamas-entered-israel/">Iron Wall</a>, wells of semantic offence rise from aquifers of generational trauma and justified fear.</p>
<h2>The enduring offence of neutrality</h2>
<p>Neutral language is only <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17512786.2013.765638">one of several rituals</a> through which journalists have long buttressed an <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5777551/">occupational ideology</a> centred on truth-telling.</p>
<p>Their stuffiest aspirational ideals — such as professed impartiality, putative firewalls between news and commentary and the mantra “<a href="https://americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/verification-accuracy/journalism-discipline-verification/">journalism is a discipline of verification</a>” — have been upstaged by an emphasis on transparency and <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17512786.2012.667269">networked collaboration</a>.</p>
<p>Today’s 24/7 feed of alerts and updates includes a stew of alleged <em>facts</em> and newsy <em>opinions</em>. Some say this is OK because <em>truth</em> is whatever people <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1461670X.2018.1492881">come to believe</a> after exposure to a variety of reports. </p>
<p>An especially radical <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781003223146-4/shifting-truths-altered-missions-ivor-shapiro">post-truth doctrine</a> considers facts ascertainable only through the lens of people’s life experiences. According to this view, sometimes dubbed “<a href="https://www.persuasion.community/p/-you-just-wont-understand">standpoint epistemology</a>,” truth-seekers should defer to the realities born, especially, of suffering and prejudice.</p>
<p>Given such ground-shaking critiques, barely a tremor registered when major news sources began <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/09/22/why-the-new-york-times-decided-it-is-now-okay-to-call-donald-trump-a-liar/">calling blatant untruths <em>lies</em></a> and <a href="https://www.poynter.org/reporting-editing/2019/now-that-the-ap-says-its-ok-heres-a-guide-for-using-the-terms-racist-and-racism/">discriminatory acts <em>racist</em></a>. So, then, why not <em>terrorist</em>?</p>
<p>Where editors cling on to neutral language, it’s partly to avoid slippery slopes. Leading Israelis have, in recent months, used startlingly non-neutral terms — such as <a href="https://www.timesofisrael.com/ex-idf-general-likens-military-control-of-west-bank-to-nazi-germany/"><em>war crime</em></a> and <a href="https://apnews.com/article/israel-apartheid-palestinians-occupation-c8137c9e7f33c2cba7b0b5ac7fa8d115"><em>apartheid</em></a> — to describe their own country’s management of occupied lands, even as foreign critics were tagged <em>antisemitic</em>. Now, the Oct. 7 attacks <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/11/it-was-a-pogrom-beeri-survivors-horrific-attack-hamas-terrorists?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other">are described</a> as <em>pogroms</em> and the siege of Gaza as <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2023/10/14/this-is-genocide"><em>genocide</em></a>.</p>
<p>If terms like these are queued next on the why-not playlist of editorial style, it’s merely pragmatic to prefer words denoting data (<em>killed</em>) over those inviting adjudication (<em>murdered</em>).</p>
<h2>The reporter’s role as listener</h2>
<p>Beyond pragmatism, the pull to neutral ground is consistent with a ubiquitous conception of a journalists’ professional identity.</p>
<p>Despite this century’s digital-information disruptions and social-justice reckonings, many journalists still aspire to “report things as they are.” </p>
<p>The 67-country Worlds of Journalism Study, fielded in the mid-2010s, <a href="https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.7312/hani18642-008/html">found surprising resilience</a> in journalists’ self-understanding as “detached observers and objective bystanders.” These ideals were developed in industrialized western countries and successfully exported to other news cultures “through institutional transfer, training, and education, as well as the diffusion of occupational ideologies.”</p>
<p>According to this vision, journalists aren’t qualified to denounce war criminals; at best, they might <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/middle-east/what-war-crimes-laws-apply-israel-palestinian-conflict-2023-10-11/">clearly explain</a> the established protocols for proscribing warfare. </p>
<p>Professional roles <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique/article/abs/just-who-do-canadian-journalists-think-they-are-political-role-conceptions-in-global-and-historical-perspective/DCB9ED6A6D9F808E88A8A1373228B5B8">shape</a> collective standards and influence, <a href="https://scholar.google.com/scholar?as_q=&as_epq=Epic%20snowmen%2C%20expert%20takes%2C%20and%20audience%20orientation%3A%20How%20journalistic%20roles%20are%20performed%20in%20Canadian%20media.&as_occt=title&as_sauthors=Nicole+Blanchett&as_ylo=2022&as_yhi=2022&as_sdt=1.&as_sdtp=on&as_sdtf=&as_sdts=22&">however imperfectly</a>, practice. Some jobs demand partiality, others even-handedness. But for those in conciliatory roles, such as mediators and therapists, a key demand is non-judgmental listening.</p>
<p>Something similar may apply to responsible journalism. </p>
<p>Just three days after the most devastating attacks on Jews since the Holocaust, it was a reporter for the Israeli newspaper <a href="https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/2023-10-10/ty-article/.premium/at-first-we-were-ecstatic-gazans-respond-to-hamas-attack-calling-it-a-historic-day/0000018b-183f-df31-a99f-7dff4de70000"><em>Haaretz</em></a> who interviewed Gaza residents about Hamas’s invasion and its consequences.</p>
<p>The report conveyed ordinary people’s raw reactions — longing, rage, dread. One woman said that after early reports: “We were ecstatic.… But as the picture became clearer, and I saw that there were Israeli prisoners, I realized that we were in a nightmare, in hell.”</p>
<p>Likewise, an interview in the U.S. magazine <a href="https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2023/10/peter-beinart-israel-palestine-conflict.html"><em>Slate</em> relayed the voice of a peace activist</a> “reeling at the images of the brutality” while struggling, as he put it, to balance solidarity with his fellow Jews against the attacks’ historical background.</p>
<p>“This didn’t happen (because) Palestinians are just some terrible other form of human beings,” he said. Rather, they had “endured so much horror and trauma that they’re responding in this case in really, really terrible ways.”</p>
<p>Reports like this include emotive words, but in quotation marks. For reporters to honour their listening role demands a disciplined withholding of judgment that requires, in turn, a restrained lexicon. The hoped-for result: a more deeply informed populace.</p>
<h2>Elevating facts as an act of faith</h2>
<p>Reporters’ professional duty to mirror what’s being said and done stems from their most <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781003223146-5/profession-whose-time-come-ivor-shapiro?context=ubx">foundational duty</a>: meeting communities’ need to know what’s going on. How close is the downtown fire to my kid’s school? Is the furniture factory downsizing? Has mom’s apartment building been bombed?</p>
<p>Facts matter locally, <a href="https://www.wits.ac.za/news/latest-news/general-news/2018/2018-03/guptaleaks-team-wins-sas-biggest-journalism-award.html">nationally</a>, and internationally (see war, above). Constitutional democracies foster autonomous news-gathering through a <a href="https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/mono/10.4324/9781003223146-2/toward-free-press-ivor-shapiro?context=ubx">range of protections</a> that include source confidentiality, libel defences, access to restricted areas and <a href="https://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/july-2023/national-news-strategy/">various forms of taxpayer-funded subsidy</a>.</p>
<p>Why? Because these democracies recognize the pursuit and publication of factual information about current affairs (that is, <em>news</em>) to comprise a <a href="https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000380618?2=null&queryId=0a30ee11-7640-48c0-b1c3-8d7e1e5dc867">“public good.”</a> </p>
<p>According to the <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/digital-news-report/2023/interactive">Reuters Institute at Oxford University</a>, significant numbers of people in many countries remain inclined to trust the news sources they follow, sources often chosen for displaying the decidedly old-fashioned virtues of <a href="https://reutersinstitute.politics.ox.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2021-04/Toff_et_al_Listening_to_What_Trust_in_News_Means_to_Users_FINAL.pdf">“balance and impartiality”</a>. </p>
<p>For their part, the most responsible journalists know that their choices of stories, sources and words sometimes deepen innocent people’s wounds. Minimizing harm stands alongside truth-telling amongst journalists’ <a href="https://rshare.library.torontomu.ca/articles/journal_contribution/Who_owns_the_news_The_right_to_be_forgotten_and_journalists_conflicting_principles/14636667">frequently conflicting principles</a> but making facts plain could carry more weight than that borne by professional diligence. </p>
<p>If so, the enduring draw of unembellished facts could express a collective leap of faith — a gut belief that “reporting things as they are” will ultimately do less harm than good.</p>
<p>And perhaps it will. Perhaps, by expanding the supply of plain truths about human beings’ lives, self-restrained reporters nurture world views that are more expansive and less authoritarian than those fed by prejudices, truisms, and lies.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/215626/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ivor Shapiro has received funding from Toronto Metropolitan University and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada. This article includes brief excerpts from his book, The Disputed Freedoms of a Disrupted Press (Routledge, July 2023). </span></em></p>
How should journalists describe Hamas, whose gunmen killed hundreds of Israelis on Oct. 7? The attacks and Israel’s response have renewed a debate about the words used by journalists.
Ivor Shapiro, Professor Emeritus, School of Journalism; Senior Fellow, Centre for Free Expression, Toronto Metropolitan University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/202083
2023-04-11T12:05:29Z
2023-04-11T12:05:29Z
Anyone can claim to be a journalist or a news organization, and publish lies with almost total impunity
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520033/original/file-20230410-26-4zi81a.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C0%2C3090%2C2046&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There are no standards for what it takes to be a journalist.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/participant-seen-holding-a-sign-outside-fox-news-hq-members-news-photo/1247874350?adppopup=true">Erik McGregor/LightRocket via Getty Images</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Headlines in early March 2023 implied Fox News mogul Rupert Murdoch had <a href="https://www.npr.org/2023/02/28/1159819849/fox-news-dominion-voting-rupert-murdoch-2020-election-fraud">made a damning confession</a>. He had affirmed that some of his most important journalists were reporting that the 2020 presidential election was a fraud – even though they knew they were propagating a lie. </p>
<p>It was an admission during pretrial testimony in a libel lawsuit filed against Fox by a voting machine company that says it was defamed by the lie. For journalism practitioners and devotees, the admission should signal the end of the Fox News empire. </p>
<p>Nope. It didn’t.</p>
<p>Such a disgraceful demise would seem inevitable when journalists – professionally trained truth gatherers, employed by a news organization, which is an institution that exists to provide truthful information – choose not to do so. </p>
<p>Nope.</p>
<p>That’s because a business that calls itself a news organization actually does not have to be one - but it does have to be a business. <a href="https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/lawevents/4/">Businesses exist primarily to make a profit</a> and doing actual news isn’t essential. Adam Serwer, reporting for <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2023/02/fox-news-dominion-voting-lawsuit-2020-election-conspiracy/673111/">The Atlantic</a>, wrote “sources at Fox told me to think of it not as a network per se, but as a profit machine.” </p>
<p>News businesses or profit machines can hire anybody who falls off a turnip truck and label them journalists because the job has <a href="https://www.bls.gov/ooh/media-and-communication/reporters-correspondents-and-broadcast-news-analysts.htm">no standardized requirements</a>. </p>
<p>The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics <a href="https://www.bls.gov/ooh/media-and-communication/reporters-correspondents-and-broadcast-news-analysts.htm">lists “None” as requirements</a> for work experience and on-the-job training for journalists but indicates a bachelor’s degree is typical. Accordingly, the Fox News business people could choose to spread election lies and insist, as court documents indicate, that it made good business sense to do so because much of their audience did not want the actual truth about that topic.</p>
<p>These are some of the troubling takeaways from Murdoch’s defense of his news business against <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint">a libel lawsuit filed by Dominion Voting</a> Systems, the company implicated by Fox’s election fraud allegations. Fox essentially admits to publishing false information about Dominion, but argues it is nonetheless protected from liability. It is a defense grounded in the <a href="https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-1/">First Amendment</a>, which protects press freedom so robustly that it also protects the irresponsible use of that freedom. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Two men at a sports game, one younger and one older." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=344&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520038/original/file-20230410-3948-1z66xz.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=433&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Lachlan Murdoch, left, and his father, Rupert Murdoch, lead the Fox corporation.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/rupert-murdoch-and-his-son-lachlan-murdoch-attend-the-news-photo/1027568416?adppopup=true">Jean Catuffe/GC Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>There’s lying … and there’s defamation</h2>
<p>Murdoch’s admission was contained in <a href="https://int.nyt.com/data/documenttools/dominion-fox-news/54e33f20f7fb6e8d/full.pdf">court documents</a> and was revealed in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/07/business/media/fox-dominion-2020-election.html">a New York Times story</a> published on March 7, 2023. The story was about the US$1.6 billion libel lawsuit <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/20527880-dominion-v-fox-news-complaint">filed against Fox News</a> by Dominion, the company Fox journalists repeatedly - and falsely - accused of rigging the 2020 presidential election to make sure Donald Trump lost. </p>
<p>Internal Fox communications, reported by the New York Times, revealed that network journalists and their news executive bosses knew the 2020 election was not fraudulent, yet continued to allow lies about the election - told by hosts and their guests - to be spread to the public. </p>
<p>Dominion claimed Fox’s audience recoiled when its journalists truthfully reported that Trump had lost the election. Dominion’s attorneys asserted that Fox feared the audience would switch their viewing allegiance to upstart conservative news organizations Newsmax and One America News.</p>
<p>In a March 31, 2023, ruling, the judge hearing the case cited examples of Fox’s internal communications that demonstrated how journalism values were supplanted by the <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23736885-dominion-v-fox-summary-judgment">language and values of business</a>. Among them was this quote attributed to a Fox Corporation board member: “If ratings go down, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/02/27/business/media/dominion-fox-news.html">revenue goes down</a>.” The judge also referred to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/31/business/fox-dominion-defamation-case.html">Dominion’s claim</a> that Fox chose to publish the (false) statements to win back viewers. </p>
<p>Court documents show Dominion’s attorneys asked Murdoch: “What should the consequences be when Fox News executives knowingly allow lies to be broadcast?” Murdoch replied: “They should be reprimanded, maybe got rid of.”</p>
<p>That response aligns with <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/editorial-standards/ethical-journalism.html#introductionAndPurpose">principles</a> widely touted by professional news organizations and established in the <a href="https://www.wiley.com/en-us/The+Ethical+Journalist%3A+Making+Responsible+Decisions+in+the+Digital+Age%2C+3rd+Edition-p-9781119777489">ethical practice</a> of journalism. Although journalism scholars and practitioners vary in their definitions of what a <a href="https://www.cjr.org/special_report/disrupting-journalism-how-platforms-have-upended-the-news-intro.php">news organization is</a> and <a href="https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/whos_a_journalist_zzzzzzzzzzzz.php">who can claim to be a journalist</a>, there is firm agreement that reporting facts, or at least making a good faith effort to do so, is an indispensable mandate for both. </p>
<p>Yet Murdoch has not indicated an intention to discipline en masse Fox News employees who violated that ethical principle. Nor is he required to. </p>
<p>Even the Society of Professional Journalists, the nation’s <a href="https://spj.org/">foremost advocate</a> for ethical journalism, <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethics-papers-code.asp">rejects punishments</a> for those who violate its principles. Its ethics code says in part: “The code is entirely voluntary. … It has no enforcement provisions or penalties for violations, and SPJ strongly discourages anyone from attempting to use it that way.” The organization concedes that news outlets can discipline their own journalists. Because journalists and their employers may be considered to be one entity, any disciplinary action is voluntary self-discipline. Neither journalists nor the news organizations they personify have to be truthful unless they want to. </p>
<p>Lying in the press is unethical but does not necessarily strip liars of the protections <a href="https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/567/709/">provided by the First Amendment</a>. There is an exception to this: the <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation">defamatory lie</a>, one that injures a person or organization’s reputation. That is what got Fox News sued.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A machine with the words 'Dominion Voting' on it, and a woman walking by in the background." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/520045/original/file-20230410-20-t0e1uv.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">The lawsuit filed by the maker of this voting machine, Dominion Voting Systems, charges that Fox News disseminated lies claiming that Dominion rigged the 2020 presidential election against Donald Trump.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/NotRealNews/4ef225a704cd42c383e7e24f7418b3a4/photo?Query=dominion%20lawsuit&mediaType=photo&sortBy=arrivaldatetime:desc&dateRange=Anytime&totalCount=38&currentItemNo=8">AP Photo/Ben Gray</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Assumptions fall</h2>
<p>Murdoch’s surprising statements were revealed in the lawsuit because his attorneys sought what’s called a “<a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/summary_judgment">summary judgment</a>” by the judge to decide the case without a trial, in order to avoid the prospect of facing a jury. That move makes sense given that some <a href="https://www.routledge.com/The-Law-of-Public-Communication/Lee-Stewart-Peters/p/book/9781032193120?gclid=EAIaIQobChMI7bmIi_-L_gIV3v_jBx0A-QzVEAAYASAAEgKm0fD_BwE">law scholars</a> have found that juries rule against media defendants three times out of four. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/frcp/rule_56">By law</a>, summary judgment is available only when the parties agree on the material facts of the case. </p>
<p>That meant Fox and Murdoch had to admit to Dominion’s most damning allegations, including confessing to broadcasting untrue statements and engaging in other unethical journalism practices. Even with those admissions, the <a href="https://www.mtsu.edu/first-amendment/article/889/actual-malice">First Amendment’s protection</a> could still give Fox a chance to win the lawsuit - particularly if a jury did not hear the case. </p>
<p>Without reaching trial or a verdict, the Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News lawsuit has already produced some unsettling results. It has challenged journalism disciples’ assumption that news organizations exist to <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/purpose-journalism/">provide the public with truthful information</a> about the most important issues in their civic lives. It has shaken journalism’s faithful who assume that <a href="https://niemanreports.org/articles/good-journalism-can-be-good-business/">good journalism is never bad</a> for the business of journalism.</p>
<p>Neither assumption is necessarily valid at Fox or anywhere. Anyone can claim to be a journalist, irrespective of their actual function. Any business can claim to be a news organization. Functioning irresponsibly in either role is largely protected by the First Amendment and is therefore optional.</p>
<p>Ethics imposed by independent state bar associations and state medical boards have made professional attorneys and physicians accountable by law as a means of ensuring responsible behavior in their roles, which are considered essential to society. Journalism ethics, which are news organization ethics, are wholly voluntary and can be set aside if they compromise profits. </p>
<p>But if the ethics violations are defamatory, a successful libel lawsuit can impose accountability with a financial cost - money damages.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/202083/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>John C. Watson 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>
A news organization doesn’t have to publish or broadcast the facts or the truth. And there are no standardized requirements to be a journalist.
John C. Watson, Associate Professor of Journalism, American University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/200460
2023-02-24T06:59:49Z
2023-02-24T06:59:49Z
South African rapper AKA’s murder video went viral - it shouldn’t have
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/511984/original/file-20230223-28-ios1yu.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Rapper Kiernan 'AKA' Forbes Known during the Metro FM awards nominations in Johannesburg in January. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Veli Nhlapo. © Sowetan.</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>In the days after the killing of rapper Kiernan Jarryd Forbes, known as AKA, and his friend Tebello “Tibz” Motsoane, the murders kept playing out on social media. Again and again, leaked CCTV footage of the two being gunned down was viewed and shared – some 490,000 times in the version of just <a href="https://twitter.com/muse_africa">one Twitter account</a>. </p>
<p>The explosive viral spread of the grainy but dramatic footage shows the limits of mainstream media ethics. Beyond the reach of press and broadcast codes and complaints mechanisms, social media platforms are driven by algorithms that measure and reward success by the millions of clicks. This often means boosting the worst and most sensational material. It’s urgently necessary to find ways of ensuring the platforms show greater responsibility.</p>
<p>Mainstream media ethics, as captured in the <a href="https://presscouncil.org.za/ContentPage?code=PRESSCODE">South African Press Code</a> and the <a href="https://www.bccsa.co.za/codes-of-conduct/">Broadcasting Code</a>, make it clear that footage of this kind can only be used if there is good reason. Violence should not be glorified, the press code says, and the depiction of violent crime should be avoided “unless the public interest dictates otherwise”. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-media-often-conflates-malicious-criticism-with-genuine-critique-why-it-shouldnt-141486">The media often conflates malicious criticism with genuine critique: why it shouldn't</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Public curiosity about the assassinations is undoubtedly high, but it’s not the same as what the codes understand as public interest. That is defined as </p>
<blockquote>
<p>information of legitimate interest or importance to citizens.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The concern about material of this kind is less about the possibility of hampering police work, <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/news/crime-and-courts/experts-say-sharing-of-leaked-footage-of-aka-and-tibzs-murders-could-hamper-investigations-4fbd2fd7-abc6-497a-926e-81c98bf49603">as some have argued</a>, but about the potential harm: <a href="https://ewn.co.za/2023/02/13/leaked-footage-of-aka-murder-torments-his-family-says-lawyer">the pain caused to a grieving family</a> and the offence caused to audiences by gratuitous and shocking violence. Where the value of material lies more in offering grisly entertainment than in its news value, publication becomes questionable.</p>
<h2>The duty to shock</h2>
<p>Editors do sometimes decide that disturbing, graphic images can be used. Examples include photographs <a href="https://www.sahistory.org.za/people/chris-hani">of assassinated South African Communist Party leader Chris Hani</a>, of a Mozambican man set alight in <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/witness-safrica-idUKNOA93176520080529">xenophobic violence in South African in 2008</a> or the footage of <a href="https://edition.cnn.com/2021/04/05/us/george-floyd-video-angle/index.html">the police killing of George Floyd</a> in the US.</p>
<p>Journalists argue there is sometimes a positive obligation to show unpleasant realities. Kelly McBride, vice-president of the US nonprofit media institute <a href="https://www.poynter.org/">Poynter Institute</a>, <a href="https://www.poynter.org/ethics-trust/2019/good-editors-must-be-thoughtful-when-showing-readers-hard-truths-like-photos-of-dead-bodies/">says</a> some images may have the “power to galvanise the public”, adding:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>it’s irresponsible for a news organisation to shield its audience from hard truths.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>However, much depends on context and the handling of the images. Responsible editors will include audience advisories so they can opt to avoid the image. Some effort to provide names and other details can help to humanise the victims, evoking more human empathy than simple ghoulish fascination.</p>
<p>In the case of the AKA and Tibs murders, most South African mainstream publishers seem to have taken the view that the circumstances did not justify the publication of the actual shooting. Most simply reported the existence of the footage.</p>
<figure class="align-right ">
<img alt="A man wearing a shirt and jacket sitting in a chair with his cusped hands resting on a table." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=754&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=948&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=948&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/511986/original/file-20230223-695-kms2t9.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=948&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Tebello ‘Tibz’ Motsoane.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Darryl Hammond © Sowetan.</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But no such restraint was shown on social media. Fascinated by the sensational murder of a music star, users shared the footage in their tens and hundreds of thousands.</p>
<p>Clearly, professional codes and mechanisms are powerless against a truly viral phenomenon of this sort. The <a href="https://www.presscouncil.org.za/">Press Council</a> and the <a href="https://www.bccsa.co.za/">Broadcasting Complaints Commission of South Africa</a> handle complaints against mainstream media, but they have no authority over the wider public on social media.</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>There is increasing concern about the spread of harmful content on social media platforms – not just gratuitous violence, but also hate speech, misinformation and much else. Several governments are developing legislation to fight toxic content. But the <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/about-us/high-commissioner">UN High Commissioner for Human Rights</a>, among others, has voiced concern that the laws may be a pretext to act against dissent.</p>
<p>Peggy Hicks, director of thematic engagement at UN Human Rights, <a href="https://www.ohchr.org/en/stories/2021/07/moderating-online-content-fighting-harm-or-silencing-dissent">says</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Some governments see this legislation as a way to limit speech they dislike and even silence civil society or other critics.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>The social media giants themselves –such as Twitter, Google and Facebook – have emphasised that they are not publishers, simply offering a platform for sharing and, therefore, don’t have to take responsibility. However, they increasingly <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/apr/24/facebook-releases-content-moderation-guidelines-secret-rules">accept the need for content moderation</a>. </p>
<p>Machines are necessary to cope with the sheer volume of material. But human content moderators have a critical role as artificial intelligence is not always smart enough to deal with complex contexts and linguistic nuance, <a href="https://www.wired.com/story/facebooks-global-reach-exceeds-linguistic-grasp/">as emerged in leaks from inside Facebook</a>. Moderators in their thousands have the unenviable task of sifting through a vast and unending flood of truly terrible material, from decapitation to child porn.</p>
<p>The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation (Unesco) is <a href="https://www.unesco.org/en/articles/internet-trust-unesco-global-conference-tackle-online-disinformation-and-hate-speech">looking into</a> the regulation of social media platforms. <a href="https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000384031.locale=en">A draft set of guidelines</a> emphasises the need for platforms to have policies based on human rights and to be accountable.</p>
<p>Fundamentally, the platforms’ algorithms operate on a logic of rewarding traffic, which needs to be tempered with considerations of the common good. According to Unesco:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>The algorithms integral to most social media platforms’ business models often prioritise engagement over safety and human rights.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Gossip sites in sensationalist feeding frenzy</h2>
<p>In the example of the AKA video, sensationalist gossip sites also traded on and drove much of the traffic. A Google search for mentions of the video is dominated by obscure sites using poor language, for whom the video is simply clickbait. Their business model relies on bulk traffic to earn advertising income, and that in turn relies on the platform giants’ algorithms.</p>
<p>That, perhaps, is the most important lesson of the uncontrollable spread of the AKA video: ways need to be found to write elements of information ethics into the platforms’ algorithms. It is deeply damaging to social cohesion to have machine logic systematically boosting the worst and most disturbing material.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/200460/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Franz Krüger is the deputy ombud of the South African Press Council. He writes in his personal capacity. </span></em></p>
The explosive viral spread of the grainy but dramatic footage shows the limits of mainstream media ethics.
Franz Krüger, Associate researcher, University of the Witwatersrand
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/181407
2022-08-05T12:14:23Z
2022-08-05T12:14:23Z
Social media provides flood of images of death and carnage from Ukraine war – and contributes to weaker journalism standards
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467537/original/file-20220607-40890-hy7er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=17%2C17%2C5974%2C3970&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">A soldier's body lies next to a destroyed Russian truck on the outskirts of Kharkiv, Ukraine, on Feb. 25, 2022.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://newsroom.ap.org/detail/RussiaUkraineWar100DaysExplainer/1a73a1612aba4c479dfb2a16af7f21cd/photo">AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Photos of civilians killed or injured in the Russia-Ukraine war are widespread, particularly online, both on social media and in professional news media. </p>
<p>Editors have always published images of dead or suffering people during times of crisis, like wars and natural disasters. But the current crisis has delivered many more of these images, more widely published online, than ever before.</p>
<p>“It’s all over social media,” says Nancy San Martin, a longtime former foreign correspondent and editor at the Miami Herald. And not just online. Mainstream journalists are also departing from their traditional tendency to avoid <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/30/us/politics/photos-uvalde.html">prominently featuring images of dead people</a> or particularly direct depictions of physical injuries.</p>
<p>But in times of conflict overseas, those standard practices tend to ease, San Martin, now deputy managing editor for the history and culture desk at National Geographic, told me in a phone interview: “War will always open that door. Part of our role is to document the consequences of war and all that it entails.”</p>
<p>Editorial oversight has traditionally been part of the equation – the practice of a group of journalists who ensure context, balancing the significance and importance of what an image depicts with its gruesomeness. They might, for instance, choose a different angle of an injured or dead person that shows less blood, or crop an image so a dead person’s face isn’t visible, or choose to withhold an image altogether while providing written information about what happened.</p>
<p>As a <a href="https://beenasarwar.files.wordpress.com/2019/08/2001-jan.-22-documentary-and-democracy-goldsmiths-college.pdf">longtime journalist and editor</a> following media, journalism and human rights, I
know images can become <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/picture-gallery/news/world/2013/04/28/iconic-war-photographs/2119175/">public icons symbolizing major events</a>.</p>
<p>The flood of images from the Ukraine war runs deep and wide. It contains many potentially iconic images but also shows more raw carnage than in past conflicts. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A black and white photograph of three dead bodies lying next to a split-rail fence." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=436&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/469057/original/file-20220615-24-g6m8g8.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=548&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Alexander Gardner’s photos, along with those of Mathew Brady, depicted casualties of the U.S. Civil War and were among the first to show people who had been killed in combat.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.loc.gov/resource/ds.05174/">Alexander Gardner via Library of Congress</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Powerful images</h2>
<p>From the <a href="https://www.life.com/history/crimea-where-war-photography-was-born/">earliest days of photography</a> in the 19th century, war has been a common subject, including <a href="https://www.nps.gov/anti/learn/historyculture/photography.htm">during the U.S. Civil War</a>. </p>
<p>Certain images have become famous, such as <a href="https://www.pulitzer.org/article/joe-rosenthal-and-flag-raising-iwo-jima">Joe Rosenthal’s World War II image of U.S. Marines</a> raising the flag on Mount Suribachi, signaling the capture of Iwo Jima from the Japanese Imperial Army in February 1945. It was distributed by The Associated Press and <a href="https://www.pulitzer.org/article/joe-rosenthal-and-flag-raising-iwo-jima">ran on the front pages</a> of many U.S. newspapers.</p>
<p>“There have always been powerful images emerging from conflict,” Pulitzer Prize-winning photographer <a href="https://patrickfarrellphotography.com/">Patrick Farrell</a> told me in a video call. “A still image is still one of the most powerful forms of media. It will sit with you forever.”</p>
<p>Many of the famous images are not of victory or glory but rather of violence and death – and also remain etched in public memory. Nick Ut’s photograph of “<a href="https://theconversation.com/50-years-after-napalm-girl-myths-distort-the-reality-behind-a-horrific-photo-of-the-vietnam-war-and-exaggerate-its-impact-183291">napalm girl</a>” Kim Phuc and John Filo’s photo of <a href="https://www.cincinnati.com/in-depth/news/history/2020/05/01/kent-state-shooting-photos-mary-ann-vecchio-impacts-nation-jeffrey-miller-john-filo/3055009001/">Mary Ann Vecchio mourning student protester Jeffrey Miller</a> at Kent State University show both the foreign and domestic toll of the Vietnam War. They were <a href="https://www.cincinnati.com/in-depth/news/history/2020/05/01/kent-state-shooting-photos-mary-ann-vecchio-impacts-nation-jeffrey-miller-john-filo/3055009001">transmitted via wire services</a>, too, and <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/04/vietnam-war-napalm-girl-photo-today">chosen to feature prominently</a> in newspapers and magazines across the country.</p>
<p>Photos of <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/jan/14/haiti-port-au-prince-deaths">bodies piled in the streets</a> after the devastating earthquake in Haiti in 2010 and floating in the water in <a href="https://www.npr.org/sections/pictureshow/2010/08/24/129400381/telling-their-stories">New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina</a> in the same year are examples of the choices made by editors across the nation to feature coverage showing the real human cost of significant natural disasters.</p>
<p>Kevin Carter’s 1993 image of a <a href="https://www.npr.org/2006/03/02/5241442/a-pulitzer-winning-photographers-suicide">vulture next to a starving child</a> in Sudan is another lasting image of human tragedy that was published by editors worldwide. It won a Pulitzer Prize in 1994.</p>
<p>Wire-distributed photos of other tragedies, including Nilufer Demir’s image of Aylan Kurdi, the Syrian boy whose body washed up on a Greek beach, and atrocities, like the <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/abuse-photos-ii/8/">images from Abu Ghraib</a> of U.S. military personnel abusing Iraqi prisoners, are also visceral reminders of complex events. </p>
<h2>Increased volume</h2>
<p>The difference between those situations and the present one in Ukraine is the sheer volume of images.</p>
<p>There are, as usual in conflict situations, award-winning professional photojournalists in Ukraine <a href="https://www.cnn.com/interactive/2022/05/world/ukraine-war-photographers-cnnphotos/">sending images back</a> to the media outlets they work for. But many of them are also posting images on their own or their employers’ <a href="https://newhumanist.org.uk/articles/4857/war-photography-in-the-age-of-social-media">social media accounts</a> – more images than might be published on a newspaper’s front page or homepage on the web.</p>
<p>Also on social media are <a href="https://theconversation.com/ukraine-how-social-media-images-from-the-ground-could-be-affecting-our-response-to-the-war-178722">legions of ordinary citizens</a> taking pictures with their smartphones and bearing witness, sharing countless images every day.</p>
<p>With the “floodgates opened by social media,” as Farrell put it, the media environment in 2022 is different from previous decades. There are now many powerful images competing to become iconic.</p>
<p>It’s “not more graphic than what we saw during Vietnam,” in Farrell’s estimation, but the media cycle then, based on daily newspapers and nightly TV news broadcasts, meant there were breaks in the barrage of imagery. </p>
<p>What’s of concern to Farrell, and to me, is that there is less editorial oversight about which images reach the most eyeballs – even in professional newsrooms. </p>
<p>With social media in the mix and the never-ending competition to be first, editors are publishing and distributing images with less consideration for traditional editorial restraint and balance between gore and meaning – and with less context about the images themselves.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="A man plays a piano in the street" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=416&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/467539/original/file-20220607-24949-939qjf.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=523&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Alexander, who did not want to provide his last name, plays a piano placed outside in the Old Town on March 29, 2022, in Lviv, Ukraine. Alexander said he was playing because he missed being able to play the piano after having to leave his behind when he fled his hometown of Kramatorsk.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/alexander-plays-a-piano-placed-outside-in-the-old-town-on-news-photo/1388364859">Joe Raedle/Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Context is vital</h2>
<p>An important element of that context is that in some ways <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/03/27/what-know-about-ukraines-lviv-struck-by-missiles-when-biden-was-250-miles-away/">life goes on</a>, says San Martin. Despite the carnage and mayhem of war, she says, the places experiencing war are still places where people make their lives. Her husband, Joe Raedle, an award-winning photographer with Getty Images, has been on the ground in Ukraine documenting both the refugee exodus and everyday life – cultural performances, restaurants serving free meals, churches providing comfort – and a <a href="https://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/alexander-plays-a-piano-placed-outside-in-the-old-town-on-news-photo/1388364859">man playing a piano on the street</a>, having left his own behind when he fled the fighting.</p>
<p>“It’s a different kind of war. Still heartbreaking,” she says, noting that there is more happening than the dominant images show. Those elements, she predicts, will become more important to full coverage of events in Ukraine as the war continues. It is going to be, as she says, “a long haul.”</p>
<p>It’s normal for media to focus on the immediacy of conflict or disaster and to highlight the most dramatic, even horrific events. But what San Martin reminds me, and what I have seen in my work, is that the journalists often give <a href="https://beenasarwar.com/2009/06/28/dr-sarwar-blog-media-matters-chapter-in-new-book-on-pakistan-india-divide/">less emphasis to the processes behind</a> events and the surrounding context – including the <a href="https://tvr2c.com/2016/10/26/beenasarwar/">survival, determination and resilience</a> of those affected.</p>
<p>Sensational images circulating on social media are similarly incomplete – or even potentially <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-ukraine-russia/fact-check-photo-of-children-saluting-ukrainian-tanks-dates-back-to-2016-idUSL1N2V10DO">false</a>, whether shared by propagandists or their innocent dupes. They represent an important, and alarming, reality. But there’s more to the picture than that.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/181407/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Beena Sarwar 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>
Many images from the Ukraine war are compelling and distressing depictions of the human costs of war.
Beena Sarwar, Visiting Professor of Journalism, Emerson College
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/173205
2022-02-04T13:08:31Z
2022-02-04T13:08:31Z
New forms of advertising raise questions about journalism integrity
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444123/original/file-20220202-17-dvum8z.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=12%2C8%2C2659%2C1350&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Is this a paid ad or a news story? Can you tell?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wellsfargo/investing-in-a-cleaner-future/">Screenshot from washingtonpost.com</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Mainstream news media outlets have, in recent years, begun to <a href="https://www.orbooks.com/catalog/black-ops-advertising-by-mara-einstein/">create advertisements that look like news articles</a> on their websites and on social media. <a href="https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/17824">My research</a> raises questions about whether this modern form of advertising might influence those outlets’ real journalism. </p>
<p>These specific advertisements are called “native advertising,” but are also tagged as “<a href="https://www.orbooks.com/catalog/black-ops-advertising-by-mara-einstein/">sponsored content</a>,” “partner post” or other labels <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918754829">consumers don’t understand</a>. They look like news articles, with headlines, photos with captions and polished text. But really they are ads created by, or on behalf of, a paying advertiser.</p>
<p>With declining revenue from traditional display advertising and classified ads, news outlets are <a href="https://www.orbooks.com/catalog/black-ops-advertising-by-mara-einstein/">increasingly relying on</a> native advertising – a sector in which U.S. spending was expected to reach <a href="https://www.outbrain.com/blog/21-native-advertising-statistics-for-2021/">$57 billion by the end of 2021</a>.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/paidpost/cole-haan/grit-and-grace.html">Fashion</a> and <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/paidpost/netflix/women-inmates-separate-but-not-equal.html">entertainment</a> companies buy native advertising. So do corporations that produce products with potentially significant environmental or health connections, such as <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/media-fossil-fuel-ads/">fossil fuels</a>, <a href="https://www.statnews.com/sponsor/2019/02/07/leveraging-technology-to-help-address-the-opioid-crisis/">opioid medications</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wp/2021/05/25/lost-amid-misinformation-real-people-real-science-real-progress/">cigarettes</a> – including in attempts to <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2021.1914445">counter negative news coverage</a>.</p>
<h2>Deceiving audiences</h2>
<p>In one example from spring 2021, Philip Morris International – the tobacco company – ran a native advertising campaign across many media outlets, including <a href="http://sponsored.bostonglobe.com/pmi/science-leading-to-a-smoke-free-future/?s_campaign=bg:article:tease">The Boston Globe</a>, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/paidpost/philip-morris-international/embracing-science-for-better-if-not-now-when.html">The New York Times</a>, <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/sponsored/we-cannot-let-misinformation-get-in-the-way-of-progress">Reuters</a> and <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wp/2021/05/25/lost-amid-misinformation-real-people-real-science-real-progress/">The Washington Post</a>. </p>
<p>The ads complained about the “<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wp/2021/05/25/lost-amid-misinformation-real-people-real-science-real-progress/">disinformation campaigns that muddy the truth</a>” regarding the benefits of vaping products while themselves muddying the truth. </p>
<p>In the past, the tobacco industry sought to <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/doubt-is-their-product-9780195300673?cc=us&lang=en&">manufacture public uncertainty</a> about the harms of its products. This time, Philip Morris is using a practice that <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/feb/25/yahoo-opens-gemini-native-advertising">media critics</a> say is deceptive and media scholar Victor Pickard calls “<a href="https://archives.cjr.org/behind_the_news/qa_victor_pickard.php">subterfuge … creating confusion between editorial and advertising content</a>,” to make claims about the benefits of its products.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=283&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=355&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=355&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/439374/original/file-20220104-23-aobs3m.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=355&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Screenshot of a native advertisement appearing in The Washington Post from Philip Morris International.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wp/2021/05/25/lost-amid-misinformation-real-people-real-science-real-progress/">Washington Post</a>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">CC BY-ND</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>These advertisements that look like real news are <a href="https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/com-disclosures-how-make-effective-disclosures-digital">labeled as ads</a>, as required by the Federal Trade Commission. But <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1080/00913367.2015.1115380">research studies</a> have <a href="https://www.doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2017.1293488">repeatedly</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884918754829">shown</a> that those labels are largely ineffective at helping readers distinguish between the two types of content.</p>
<h2>Made by journalists</h2>
<p>Many media companies have created <a href="https://thetrust.wsjbarrons.com/">content</a> <a href="https://www.tbrandstudio.com/">studios</a>, separate from their newsrooms, to <a href="http://mediashift.org/2017/10/advertisers-underwrite-new-york-times-content/">create native advertising</a> on behalf of corporate and special interest groups. While newspapers traditionally had ad departments that designed and mocked up advertisements for their clients, today’s native ads are in the form of a “story” that often does not focus on – and sometimes <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/10496491.2017.1323264">does not even mention</a> – its sponsor in order to resemble the seemingly objective journalism it imitates.</p>
<p>Sometimes those efforts have the help of intermediaries such as so-called “product marketing” teams that work between the newsroom and studios. A former “creative strategist” at The New York Times says that arrangement allows publishers “<a href="https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/native-ads.php">to skirt the implication that news staff work directly with brands to craft commercial content</a>.” In other cases, journalists write for <a href="https://thebaffler.com/salvos/rest-advertising">both the newsroom</a> <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/blurred-lines-and-black-ops-disappearing-divide-between-uk-news-and-adverti/">and their publisher’s content studio</a>.</p>
<p>Because native advertising typically has <a href="https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/native-ads.php">no bylines</a>, most people are unaware that advertisements may be created in such close connection with mainstream newsrooms. <a href="https://www.cjr.org/special_report/digital-age-the-new-york-times-slippery-path-news-advertising.php">Former</a> <a href="https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/native-ads.php">employees</a>, including a <a href="https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2019/01/jill-abramson-merchants-of-truth-book-excerpt.html">former executive editor of The New York Times</a>, say most publishers are not transparent about it with their audiences. One digital journalist told researchers, “Some people will say the ad is labeled so it’s not bad. That’s crap … the unsophisticated won’t get it and then <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764216660135">they’ll click on something meant to look exactly like a story</a>. That’s a problem.”</p>
<h2>Disappearing disclosures</h2>
<p>When native ads are <a href="https://www.cjr.org/tow_center_reports/native-ads.php">shared on social media</a>, they’re often distributed in ways that further confuse or deceive audiences.</p>
<p>The Wall Street Journal, for instance, has <a href="https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/890327274062577664">retweeted posts from its Custom Content studio</a> from the same Twitter account that promotes its news content. While this particular retweet disclosed the commercial nature of the original tweet, this is not always the case.</p>
<p>More than half the time, the FTC-required advertising disclosures disappear when the content leaves the publisher’s website and is shared on <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/joca.12212">Facebook</a> and <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1906298">Twitter</a>. For example, when I recently shared an <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/api-can-natural-gas-be-the-key-to-lowering-emissions/">American Petroleum Institute native ad</a> on Twitter, the disclosure disappeared – a violation of the FTC’s labeling mandate. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=434&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/440939/original/file-20220115-19-1q3i1qz.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=545&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When retweeted, native advertising appearing in The Washington Post from the American Petroleum Institute was no longer labeled as a paid ad.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Michelle Amazeen</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I believe it is the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2021.1906298">responsibility of publishers, not consumers</a>, to ensure that sponsored content is accurately labeled when shared online. Otherwise, <a href="https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01281190">people will amplify</a> undisclosed commercial content <a href="https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12232">they think is genuine news</a>.</p>
<h2>Suppressing news coverage?</h2>
<p>I have another concern about this type of potentially deceptive advertising. <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/08821127.2005.10677638">Since as early as 1869</a>, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884917725162">anecdotal</a> <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2017.1397531">evidence</a> has indicated that reporters are hesitant to write about advertisers that are lucrative to their news outlet. My <a href="https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/17824">recent research</a> with <a href="https://www.colorado.edu/business/leeds-directory/faculty/chris-vargo">digital advertising scholar Chris Vargo</a> signals that similar concerns may occur with this new form of advertising.</p>
<p>We counted all the native advertisements between 2014 and 2019 we could find from The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, by looking at native ads those news outlets posted on Twitter and with a custom search process we built on top of Bing. We noted what dates the native ads were published and what company sponsored them. </p>
<p>We also used the <a href="https://github.com/chrisjvargo/gdelt/blob/master/GDELT%20sources.ipynb">GDELT database</a>, which collects online news stories from those three outlets and many other mainstream, partisan, and emerging news sites across the U.S. In that data, we noted the number and dates of news stories naming major companies. </p>
<p>We found 27 companies for which there was enough information in both data sets to make a meaningful connection. For each of those 27 companies, we charted how many mentions they had in news stories over time, and compared those time periods with the timing of that company’s releases of native advertising. </p>
<p>We found that for 16 of the companies, news coverage noticeably decreased after a native advertisement was published. For just three companies, news coverage noticeably increased after a native ad was published.</p>
<p>These results suggest that advertiser-driven “news” stories – <a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/media-fossil-fuel-ads/">written and approved by paying sponsors</a> – often go unchallenged. </p>
<p>For example, Wells Fargo – a multinational financial services company plagued by a <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wells_Fargo#Lawsuits,_fines_and_controversies">litany of scandals</a>, such as <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/09/business/wells-fargo-sales-culture.html">deceiving customers with fake bank accounts</a> – engaged the content studios of The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal to create nearly a dozen native ads. One, created by The Washington Post’s BrandStudio, touted how Wells Fargo was <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/brand-studio/wellsfargo/investing-in-a-cleaner-future/">investing in a cleaner environmental future</a>. If it had been a real news article, it would have reported that the company was also financing <a href="https://www.yesmagazine.org/democracy/2016/09/29/how-to-contact-the-17-banks-funding-the-dakota-access-pipeline">the controversial underground oil transport system, the Dakota Access Pipeline</a>.</p>
<p>Our study found statistically less reporting on Wells Fargo not only within those three elite news organizations but across all U.S. online media following the native advertising campaigns.</p>
<p>[<em>Over 140,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletters to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://memberservices.theconversation.com/newsletters/?source=inline-140ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>Native ads are potentially very deceptive to consumers, in their content, their presentation and how they are shared on social media. Our research does not prove a direct connection, but when we add it to the anecdotes that <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/democracy-without-journalism-9780190946760?cc=us&lang=en&">news management discourages stories critical of important advertisers</a>, we also wonder about the power of native ads over journalists’ supposedly independent decisions regarding what to cover and when.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/173205/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Michelle A. Amazeen has received funding from The American Press Institute, the Democracy Fund, and The Rita Allen Foundation. </span></em></p>
When news outlets also publish so-called ‘native advertising,’ their journalistic reputations suffer – and their news coverage shies away from the companies that paid for the ads.
Michelle A. Amazeen, Associate Professor of Mass Communication, Boston University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/176462
2022-02-04T06:03:57Z
2022-02-04T06:03:57Z
News Corp’s deal with Google and the Melbourne Business School questioned by journalism academics
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444471/original/file-20220204-25-z0c3h4.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=0%2C1040%2C4333%2C2312&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>News Corp Australia and Google have announced the creation of the <a href="https://www.digitalnews.academy/">Digital News Academy</a> in partnership with the Melbourne Business School at the University of Melbourne. It will provide digital skills training for News Corp journalists and other media outlets.</p>
<p>Is this a good thing or a bad thing? </p>
<p>The academy won’t provide full degrees, just certificates and a chance to upgrade digital skills in a fast-changing media environment.</p>
<p>Many companies in various industries have partnered with universities to deliver what used to be in-house training programs. Strengthening the links between industry and the academy has been welcomed in many sectors and certainly encouraged by governments for many years.</p>
<p>Why then are we as journalism academics concerned? </p>
<p>There are several reasons. The first and most obvious is the incursion of a high-profile and controversial media company into the higher education sector and the extent to which that is funded by a large disruptive digital search company.</p>
<h2>Antagonism towards academia</h2>
<p>It is telling that the Digital News Academy will be housed in the University of Melbourne’s private arm, the Melbourne Business School, rather than its Centre for Advancing Journalism within the Arts faculty.</p>
<p>Australia’s largest commercial media company has long criticised university journalism education, and journalism academics, including each of the authors of this article and many of our colleagues. The company even <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/oct/13/student-indoctrination-claim-unethical-and-untrue-say-media-lecturers">once sent an incognito reporter into a University of Sydney lecture</a> to <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/uni-degrees-in-indoctrination/news-story/9f67f148e0c75c3d0d34af2416f5ab1a">uncover criticism of News Corp in the classroom</a>. That reporter, Sharri Markson, is now investigations editor at The Australian and a member of “the panel of experts” that will oversee the Digital News Academy. </p>
<hr>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=325&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444475/original/file-20220204-25-1q0dv82.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=408&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">DNA.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>So it comes as no surprise that News Corp has avoided journalism programs.</p>
<p>News Corp Australasia’s executive chairman, Michael Miller, has said part of the academy’s role will be building a stronger Australia by keeping society informed through “strong and fearless news reporting and advocacy”. </p>
<p>Yet partnering with a journalism program would have facilitated that. It might also have helped assuage News Corp critics, some of whom have been active online during the week with reminders about News Corp’s unethical conduct during the hacking scandal and its disregard for scientific evidence in its reporting on climate change. </p>
<p>University journalism courses teach ethics and critical thinking alongside practical skills such as new digital ways of fact checking, gathering information and telling stories. Google Australia already offers free tutorials to journalism programs about smart ways to use its search engine to find and check investigative stories.</p>
<p>University journalism programs also distinguish between training and education; the former is predominantly about skills, the latter places those skills in context and teaches students how to think critically about the industry and environment in which they work. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/more-than-protection-australian-journalism-needs-better-standards-171117">More than protection, Australian journalism needs better standards</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>By placing this course in a business school and not a liberal arts or humanities faculty, the venture gets the kudos of the University of Melbourne’s backing without the challenging academic culture News Corp dislikes. </p>
<p>News Corp and Google are corporate clients, paying the university for these courses, so the capacity for independent criticism of Australia’s most dominant newspaper company is eroded even further.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="The Digital News Academy will be within the Melbourne Business School, rather than the University of Melbourne's Centre for Advancing Journalism." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=397&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/444504/original/file-20220204-19-iru8er.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=499&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The Digital News Academy will be housed within the Melbourne Business School, rather than the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Advancing Journalism.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>What will the Digital News Academy do?</h2>
<p>All we know so far about the academic credibility of the Digital News Academy comes from its promotional announcement, in press releases <a href="https://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/media/digital-evolution-news-corp-google-unite-to-train-journalists/news-story/e2e0dfa37dba21b135dccfa02280affa">reported</a> in the Media section of The Australian (published by News Corp). </p>
<p>The publicity says the nine-month course will take 750 enrolments from journalists at News Corp Australia, Australian Community Media (the stable of 160 regional publications formerly owned by Fairfax) and smaller media partners.</p>
<p>A “governance committee” will select candidates (who nominate themselves or are put forward by their employers). These students will be expected to use the Google suite of tools as they collaborate online at the Melbourne Business School, to generate, build and sell stories to the course’s “Virtual Academy Newsroom”.</p>
<p>Each year there will be what is being billed as a major journalism conference and a US study tour for a select group of trainees.</p>
<p>There are no public details yet of the academic credentials of the certificate program but the academy has drawn on a “panel of experts”, almost all of whom come from inside News Corp and Google.</p>
<h2>Google gains influence</h2>
<p>It’s easy to see why Google was motivated to fund a News Corp training academy above and beyond what it is required to do as part of its bid to stop further intervention in its workings by the Australian government under the terms of the News Media Bargaining Code.</p>
<p>But there are some deeper questions about why a company that has such a stranglehold on the new digital economy is involved. By funding the academy Google may be undercutting full university degrees specialising in journalism.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/the-news-media-bargaining-code-could-backfire-if-small-media-outlets-arent-protected-an-economist-explains-155745">The news media bargaining code could backfire if small media outlets aren't protected: an economist explains</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Relying on Google to make up the shortfall in news organisations’ training budgets is a problem. It allows Google to shape curriculum while appearing to be a champion of the same journalism industry it has been accused of undermining.</p>
<p>As journalism academics we respect the need for specialised training and skills development. But journalism programs should never be captured or constrained from being critical of the industry for which they prepare students. They should continue to embed ethics in their courses. The aim, after all, is to improve journalism, for everybody’s benefit.</p>
<p>As it is often said, <a href="https://biblio.com.au/book/just-another-business-journalists-citizens-media/d/665176342?aid=frg&gclid=CjwKCAiAl-6PBhBCEiwAc2GOVK3MhOR3JubEbpE5gFZkdlJUIcRSrMUbLODaMj_bpEKyTPtUbY4WlBoCB0MQAvD_BwE.">news is not just another business</a>. While studying journalism often involves the study of business, business imperatives should not drive the study of journalism itself.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/176462/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Dodd worked as a journalist at The Australian newspaper and has provided in-house legal and news writing training for News Corp. He is currently employed as the director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, which is mentioned in this article. </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Alexandra Wake provided in-house training for the ABC and for Australian Provincial Newspapers. She is the elected President of the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia and is the current programs manager for journalism at RMIT.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Ricketson has worked on staff at The Australian, among other news outlets. He was a member of the Finkelstein inquiry into the media and media regulation which was sharply criticised in News Corp Australia publications. His appointment as the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance's representative on the Press Council was also criticised by News Corp Australia. </span></em></p>
Does Australia benefit from Google paying for News Corp training?
Andrew Dodd, Director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
Alexandra Wake, Program Manager, Journalism, RMIT University
Matthew Ricketson, Professor of Communication, Deakin University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/173057
2021-12-05T16:49:21Z
2021-12-05T16:49:21Z
How 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 Minnesota
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/165158
2021-07-29T12:23:21Z
2021-07-29T12:23:21Z
The largest news agency in the US changes crime reporting practices to ‘do less harm and give people second chances’
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413432/original/file-20210727-13-osmn5i.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=8%2C33%2C5599%2C3699&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Reporting about minor crimes is about to change.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/photo/teenager-being-handcuffed-royalty-free-image/180703112?adppopup=true">Illustration by kali9/iStock/Getty Images Plus</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>When suspects’ names appear in crime stories, their lives may be broken and never put back together. </p>
<p>For years, people have begged The Associated Press, known as the “AP,” to scrub their indiscretions from its archives. Some of those requests “were heart-rending,” said John Daniszewski, standards vice president at AP who helped to spearhead the worldwide news service’s <a href="https://apnews.com/article/crime-technology-df0a7cd66590d9cb29ed1526ec03b58f">new policy</a>.</p>
<p>Acknowledging that journalism can inflict wounds unnecessarily, AP will no longer name those arrested for minor crimes when the news service is unlikely to cover the story’s subsequent developments. Often, such stories’ publication hinges on an odd or entertaining quirk, and the names are irrelevant. Yet, the ramifications can loom large and be long-lasting for the persons named.</p>
<p>How much detail American reporters include in a crime story depends on how newsworthy it is, <a href="https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190863531.001.0001/oso-9780190863531">our research found</a>. A minor story might be based solely on a police incident report. A big story, the kind discussed around the water cooler, can include interviews with acquaintances and deep probes into the person’s past. Whether the story is big or small, most accounts include full identification of the accused in the American press.</p>
<p>“I received a very moving letter from a man who, as a college student, had been involved in a financial crime,” Daniszewski recalled in an interview with us, both <a href="https://www.duq.edu/academics/faculty/margaret-patterson">media ethics</a> <a href="https://www.fims.uwo.ca/people/profiles/romayne_smith_fullerton.html">scholars</a>. When an old news account of the incident surfaced, the young man lost friends. Even his upcoming marriage was jeopardized until he could persuade his fiancée and her family that he had learned from his experience and was not an incorrigible villain.</p>
<p>For others, stories of their alleged crimes showed up on Google searches 10 or 15 years after the incident, even if they were never convicted or courts had expunged the criminal record. Daniszewski said many people making requests to the AP had been arrested for minor drug offenses, such as small amounts of marijuana, but stories about those offenses were blocking them from getting jobs, renting apartments and even meeting people on dating apps. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="The Whitman County courthouse in Colfax, Washington." src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.jpeg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413430/original/file-20210727-15524-1t7wb0f.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">News organizations don’t always follow their reporting that someone has been criminally charged by going to court to see how the case is resolved.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/whitman-county-courthouse-in-colfax-washington-news-photo/1289092542?adppopup=true">Don & Melinda Crawford/Education Images/Universal Images Group via Getty Images</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Culture shift</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.ap.org/about/">Associated Press</a>, the largest American news agency, was founded in 1846. It is a cooperative enterprise whose members include most mainstream American news outlets and many in other countries.</p>
<p>AP’s new policy signals a shift in U.S. politics and culture. It takes a small step away from the traditional “tell-all” practice of American crime reporting. It embraces a bit of the empathy toward wrongdoers shown by reporters in some European countries.</p>
<p>We interviewed nearly 200 reporters and media experts in 10 countries in Western Europe and North America for our book, “<a href="https://oxford.universitypressscholarship.com/view/10.1093/oso/9780190863531.001.0001/oso-9780190863531">Murder in Our Midst: Comparing Crime Coverage Ethics in an Age of Globalized News</a>.” We uncovered significant differences in journalism practices, despite the similarities in these countries’ democratic institutions and values.</p>
<p><a href="https://www.presserat.de/files/presserat/dokumente/download/Press%20Code.pdf">German</a>, <a href="https://www.rvdj.nl/english/guidelines">Dutch</a> and <a href="https://research.tuni.fi/ethicnet/country/sweden/code-of-ethics-for-the-press-radio-and-television/">Swedish</a> press council ethics codes encourage protecting the identity of both suspects and those convicted. These codes are largely voluntary and allow each news outlet to make case-by-case decisions, but their default practice is not to identify. </p>
<p>In those countries, journalists withhold the full names of those arrested or even convicted of crimes except in some cases of public figures or crimes of particular public concern. Instead, news accounts carry just initials or a first name and last initial to shield that person from publicity. </p>
<p>Since 1973, <a href="https://second.wiki/wiki/lebach-urteil">German courts have mandated</a> that news reports refrain from identifying inmates as their prison release draws near to allow for their “resocialization” and “right to personality” or reputation. </p>
<h2>Irreparable harm</h2>
<p>When we asked an editor at ANP, the Netherlands’ counterpart to the AP, why her staff routinely withheld names, she paused, then said: “What if he had children? They did nothing wrong,” yet they would be irreparably harmed by being tagged as a criminal’s offspring.</p>
<p>While German, Dutch and Swedish reporters expressed similar concern for families, they also said they wanted to preserve the presumption of innocence for those merely accused and the ability to resume a productive life for those who were convicted.</p>
<p>When the Dutch editor learned how many deeply personal details American reporters routinely publish about those arrested, she gasped at what she saw as cruel and unethical. “Why would you do that to someone?” she asked.</p>
<p>Most American reporters we interviewed regretted the harm such revelations caused but saw the practice as collateral damage. In their eyes, their first obligation is acting as a watchdog on police and government. They believe the public has the right to public information, and police should never be trusted with the power to make undisclosed arrests. That commitment runs much deeper in the U.S. than it does in the Netherlands. For the most part, “we trust our government,” said one official of the Dutch union of journalists.</p>
<p>Watchdog ethics loom large at the AP, Daniszewski told us. However – as the research for our book found – journalism ethics and practices are rooted in culture. And the American “zeitgeist” around the criminal justice is shifting, Daniszewski said.</p>
<p>In 2018, <a href="https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/who-deserves-to-have-their-past-mistakes-e2-80-9cforgotten-e2-80-9d-newspapers-are-trying-to-figure-it-out/ar-BB1dJEHE">The (Cleveland) Plain Dealer began considering petitions</a> to remove some stories from its archives. <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/media/old-arrest-boston-globe-fresh-start/2021/01/22/122cbd0c-5cd1-11eb-b8bd-ee36b1cd18bf_story.html">The Boston Globe’s Fresh Start initiative</a> made a similar move this year. These are small steps when compared with the <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/09/24/763857307/right-to-be-forgotten-only-applies-inside-eu-european-court-says">European Union’s guarantee that citizens have a “right to be forgotten</a>” by having at least some humiliating stories removed from search engine archives.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="Statement by the Boston Globe about its Fresh Start Initiative" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=441&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/413433/original/file-20210727-22-nj0tv7.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=555&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Text on the webpage of The Boston Globe’s Fresh Start Initiative, which allows people to petition to have their name removed or added to old stories, or removed from Google searches.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/22/metro/globes-fresh-start-initiative-submit-your-appeal/">Screenshot, https://www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/22/metro/globes-fresh-start-initiative-submit-your-appeal/</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Public figures</h2>
<p>Journalists in all 10 countries we researched agreed that the public needs to know when politicians are accused of crimes tied to their official duties. </p>
<p>When a politician or celebrity is alleged to have committed major crime, like a hit-and-run accident, the press should name names, most journalists in our sample agreed. The press must also pin blame, journalists said, when political crimes affect public welfare.</p>
<p>However, Dutch reporters and others often turn a blind eye when celebrities or political officials are accused of domestic violence or sexual harassment, which they consider private indiscretions. American reporters are more likely to consider such accusations news. </p>
<p>Private individuals committing crimes, even major crimes, are rarely identified in mainstream news accounts in the Netherlands, Sweden or Germany, despite those names being on the public record with the potential to be revealed by tabloids and websites. One reason: “We believe everyone deserves a second chance,” said Thomas Bruning, head of the Dutch journalists union.</p>
<p>Is a similar sentiment catching hold in the United States?</p>
<p>[<em>Over 100,000 readers rely on The Conversation’s newsletter to understand the world.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters/the-daily-3?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=100Ksignup">Sign up today</a>.]</p>
<p>The U.S. incarcerates felons in places we call “penitentiaries,” Daniszewski said – that is, places for repentance. The term might imply forgiveness could follow, but in fact felons are stigmatized for life, he said. </p>
<p>The AP will never sugar-coat accounts of serious crime nor whitewash public corruption, he vowed. But speaking of the AP’s new policy, he said, “We thought if we could do less harm and give people second chances, it would be for the good.”</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/165158/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Maggie Jones Patterson received funding for this research from the Mort Weissman Memorial Fund, the Social Science and Humanities Research Council of Canada, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and Duquesne University Faculty Research Fund. She is affiliated with the Society of Professional Journalists, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication, and PublicSource . </span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Romayne Smith Fullerton 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>
The Associated Press will no longer name those arrested in minor crimes when the news service is unlikely to cover the story’s resolution. That’s a major shift in US news culture.
Maggie Jones Patterson, Professor of Journalism, Duquesne University
Romayne Smith Fullerton, Associate Professor, Information and Media Studies, Western University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/162726
2021-06-15T14:53:19Z
2021-06-15T14:53:19Z
Christian Eriksen broadcast, the BBC and the question of public interest
<p>Football spectators around the world watched in horror as 29-year-old Danish footballer Christian Eriksen lay prone on the field in cardiac arrest, his teammates running to his aid. Cameras focused in and lingered, framing the player as he received chest compressions, his life hanging in the balance.</p>
<p>As medical staff delivered CPR, the camera – aerial shots and close-ups – continued to linger. When Eriksen’s teammates formed a protective circle around him, the cameras moved on to his visibly distressed partner, showing close-ups of her crying. And so it went on until finally, a full quarter of an hour later, coverage returned to commentators in the studio.</p>
<p>This dramatic scene was the reality of the Denmark-Finland Euros 2020 match, but according to many critics, it might as well have been a detective drama or reality police show. “CUT TO THE STUDIO!” <a href="https://twitter.com/IanWright0/status/1403757184933142532">tweeted</a> former footballer and analyst Ian Wright, speaking for many.</p>
<p>From an ethical point of view, this situation raises one simple question: Why did broadcasters show these prolonged, distressing images? The answer is far less simple, and may be an unpalatable one to digest.</p>
<p>Responding to complaints, the BBC, who were streaming the match in Britain, <a href="https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/football/christian-eriksen-bbc-apology-denmark-collapse-euro-2021-b940293.html">apologised</a> for showing the the upsetting images, but placed the blame on host broadcaster UEFA.</p>
<p>While it is certainly true that UEFA was responsible for the content of the broadcast, this sidesteps the issue that the BBC and other networks could have cut the feed and returned to the studio earlier. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1403757184933142532"}"></div></p>
<p>Could it be that the people making the key broadcasting decisions, whether that was UEFA as the provider, or the BBC as the UK rights holder, decided to stay with the on-field images for 15 minutes because they knew it made fascinating television? Was this therefore just another instance of “giving the people what they want”? At this time there is no data or empirical evidence to indicate that, despite the outcry, millions turned off their television sets in protest at what was being beamed into their living rooms. </p>
<h2>Public interest v interested public</h2>
<p>This case highlights one of the key journalistic ethical dilemmas. The concept of “public interest” has been a longstanding defence of publishing or broadcasting controversial material which many think should not be in the public domain. Something being “in the public interest” can be prioritised over editorial codes and guidelines which are in place to protect people.</p>
<p>Such guidelines apply to areas such as privacy and intrusion into grief, both of which are obviously pertinent to the Eriksen situation.</p>
<p>The BBC is legally obliged to adhere to the Ofcom (Office of Communications) <a href="https://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv-radio-and-on-demand/broadcast-codes/broadcast-code">regulatory set of codes</a>, which includes sections on privacy as well as harm and offence. The former section sets out to “ensure that broadcasters avoid any unwarranted infringement of privacy”, and clarifies: “Broadcasters should not take or broadcast footage … of people caught up in emergencies, victims of accidents or those suffering a personal tragedy, even in a public place … unless it is warranted”. </p>
<p>It is that final word that makes this such an interesting ethical dilemma. The broadcasting code goes into detail about how it defines “warranted”, stating that an invasion of privacy is warranted if the broadcaster can demonstrate it is “in the public interest”. </p>
<p>As uncomfortable as some people may find the fact, a section of the viewing public were interested and certainly did not switch off (and of course, it is surely fair to suggest that many of those who complained continued to watch). So, accepting that the images originated with UEFA, could we make the claim that the BBC was giving the people what they wanted? Is this an inconvenient truth in the field of journalistic ethics?</p>
<p>Just as many people slow down to look at a car crash, is the outcry at the BBC’s coverage formed out of a hypocritical position and if so, how do regulatory bodies such as Ofcom legislate for such a situation? </p>
<p>As is so often the case, this case falls within a grey area of the regulatory codes and will inevitably lead to calls for the codes to be tightened, rewritten or even for a new clause to be added. While this is understandable, there is often a reluctance to amend codes relating to privacy for the fear of negative consequences such as a reduction in the press’s ability to use the public interest defence to shine a light into society’s dark corners.</p>
<p>Ethically, there is a key distinction to be made between, on the one hand, what public interest actually means in practice (exposing wrongdoing, holding the powerful to account), and on the other, what interests the public. </p>
<p>The coverage of Christian Eriksen offended many – and the BBC quickly offered an apology – but the decision to continue with the broadcast, and the way cameras focused in with voyeuristic intensity, raises a rather unpalatable truth: broadcasters may well be providing what at least some of us want.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/162726/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Whitworth 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 BBC apologised for broadcasting images of Christian Eriksen’s collapse, but were they just giving the public what it wants?
James Whitworth, University Teacher, Department of Journalism Studies, University of Sheffield
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/155257
2021-02-22T13:17:14Z
2021-02-22T13:17:14Z
Public trust in the media is at a new low: a radical rethink of journalism is needed
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/384988/original/file-20210218-14-fsnk9n.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&rect=24%2C0%2C5307%2C3234&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EFE-EPA/Kim Ludbrook</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>A recent <a href="https://sanef.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SANEF-ethics-report-OK.pdf">report</a> by an independent panel on the ethics and credibility of South Africa’s news media makes for worrying reading. The panel, headed by retired judge <a href="https://www.ru.ac.za/communicationsandadvancement/alumnirelations/theorunion/distinguishedalumniawards/2019recipients/kathysatchwell.html">Kathy Satchwell</a>, was commissioned by the South African National Editors’ Forum following a <a href="https://theconversation.com/journalism-makes-blunders-but-still-feeds-democracy-an-insiders-view-146364">series of ethical lapses</a> by the <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/">Sunday Times</a>. The paper dominated the country’s media landscape for <a href="https://www.newsbank.com/libraries/colleges-universities/solutions/resources-location/sunday-times-archive-1906-today">over 100 years</a>. As the largest by circulation it was also considered the most powerful newspaper.</p>
<p>The lapses included factual inaccuracies in reports on allegations of <a href="https://www.politicsweb.co.za/documents/sunday-times-taco-kuiper-runnerup-award-revoked--a">police killings</a> as well as reports on <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-30597414">alleged illegal deportations of Zimbabweans</a>. Another major story was about an alleged <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/lifestyle/2014-12-06-sars-suspends-rogue-unit-men-after-expos/">‘rogue unit’</a> within the South African Revenue Service. </p>
<p>The panel <a href="https://sanef.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/SANEF-ethics-report-OK.pdf">found</a> that the newspaper had ‘failed in the most basic tenets of journalistic practice’.</p>
<p>These failures included not giving any – or adequate –opportunity to affected parties to respond to the stories pre-publication. Others included failing to seek credible and sourced validation of the allegations made against individuals.</p>
<p>The panel concluded that the failures had caused great emotional and financial harm to the people concerned, their families and their careers.</p>
<p>The newspaper has since <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/news/2018-10-13-we-got-it-wrong-and-for-that-we-apologise/">apologised</a> for the reports, and retracted them. </p>
<p>Having ethical lapses on such a major scale can only further erode the public’s trust in the media. More recently, investigative journalist Jacques Pauw’s admission that allegations he had previously made in a <em>Daily Maverick</em> <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2021-02-17-editors-note-on-retracted-jacques-pauw-column-about-his-arrest-at-the-va-waterfront-and-an-apology-to-our-readers/">column</a> were based on distorted facts led to a widespread outcry. It was <a href="https://mediamonitoringafrica.org/2021/02/17/media-release-jacques-pauw-didnt-merely-ruin-his-reputation-he-dealt-another-blow-to-media-credibility/">pointed out</a> that Pauw not only undermined his own credibility, but also further eroded trust in journalism. </p>
<p>It is clear that South African journalism has much work to do to rebuild this lost trust. Not only for their own sake, but in view of the growing crisis of disinformation. The panel’s report refers to the <a href="https://disinformationindex.org/">Global Disinformation Index</a> which suggests that 41% of South Africans distrust the media. And a worrying 70% have problems distinguishing news from “fake” news. </p>
<p>So, how should this rebuilding of trust be done? Clearly not by merely superficially papering over ethical cracks, nor overhauling the well-functioning <a href="https://journals.ufs.ac.za/index.php/com/article/view/3726">media regulatory system</a>. While apologies for and corrections of mistakes are important to show public accountability, journalists should also recommit to the principles underlying these processes. </p>
<p>The country’s <a href="https://www.presscouncil.org.za/ContentPage?code=PRESSCODE">press code</a> highlights the public interest as the central guideline. This entails, aside from striving for truth, avoiding harm and acting independently, the reflection of a multiplicity of voices in the coverage of events, showing a special concern for children and other vulnerable groups, and being sensitive to the cultural customs of readers and the subjects of reportage.</p>
<p>This emphasis on diversity of voices and awareness of social context should be the starting point for any attempt to regain the public’s trust. As the code states at the outset: </p>
<blockquote>
<p><a href="https://www.presscouncil.org.za/ContentPage?code=PRESSCODE">The media exist to serve society</a>.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>One way of doing this is to adopt an <a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/publications/how-a-culture-of-listening-strengthens-reporting-and-relationships/">“ethics of listening”</a>. I explore this in my new book <a href="https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-ethics-of-engagement-9780190917333?cc=us&lang=en&#">The Ethics of Engagement</a>.</p>
<p>The central theme of my argument is that journalists must reach beyond their usual audiences to include those that normally appear only on the margins of media coverage. And they must review how those voices are reported, and how they appear in the media. </p>
<p>This approach will result in a more genuine dialogue and an approach that’s more participatory. This could, in turn, contribute to a thorough reassessment of the media’s relationship with the public in a way that could rebuild trust.</p>
<h2>Public journalism</h2>
<p>There are some examples of how this could be done. For instance Heather Robertson, former editor of <em>The Herald</em> newspaper in South Africa’s Eastern Cape Province, conducted a series of <a href="https://www.academia.edu/37070536/When_an_editor_listens_to_a_city">listening exercises</a> attended by community members, opinion leaders and journalists. Some interesting case studies can also be found in Australia, where community media journalists, media scholars and activists teamed up to design a <a href="https://tanjadreher.net/current-research/">“listening programme”</a>. </p>
<p>To some extent these projects are similar to the much older tradition of <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02500167.2020.1862966">“public journalism”</a>. It provides that the media should address citizens not merely as spectators or victims, but empower them to solve their problems. One way this was done was to host public discussions and facilitate meetings to support deliberative democracy. More recently, the potential for<a href="https://digitalpublicsquare.org/"> digital media platforms</a> to connect journalists to audiences has also been explored. </p>
<p>Applying this approach in South Africa would have major benefits. The country is socially polarised and highly unequal. Making the extra effort to actively listen to voices outside the journalists’ normal target audiences, especially marginal voices, would transform the narratives being shared. </p>
<p>This would help journalists gain wider social legitimacy among those who may feel the media is disconnected from their everyday lives. </p>
<p>But ethical listening doesn’t merely accommodate voices from marginalised communities, only to treat them as victims or as objects of pity.</p>
<p>Instead, it requires a fundamental revision of the relationship between journalists and their various audiences, one in which power relations are radically revised or overturned. A more reciprocal relationship with their divergent audiences would require journalists to let go of their desire to control the narrative, or tendency to listen only to obtain answers to questions already formulated. </p>
<p>Of course this does not mean that journalists no longer have any say over their reporting. Nor that they don’t have to take any ethical responsibility for the questions they ask. The difference in this kind of listening is that it creates a true dialogue, in the sense that the responses are allowed to alter, shift and speak back to the original agenda rather than made to fit into it.</p>
<p>Listening can, therefore, be seen as fundamental to democratic politics because it constitutes a public sphere premised on participation, tolerance and inclusion. </p>
<h2>What next</h2>
<p>The panel’s report identified much larger, systemic problems in the wider South African media landscape. These include revenue challenges to media outlets, shrinking resources for training and for the effective exercise of editorial checks and balances. It also listed the pressure, fuelled by social media, to break stories ever faster amid competing misinformation and disinformation narratives as well as societal pressures.</p>
<p>Linked to the rebuilding of trust should be a strong commitment to support community media and the public broadcaster to add to the diversity of voices.</p>
<p>There can be little doubt that ethical lapses have added significant dents to the public’s trust in the media. </p>
<p>An appropriate response to the ethical problems plaguing the South African media requires thinking about the question of ethics as a more radical project – one which requires a reaffirmation of journalism’s central values, a recommitment to media diversity, and exploration of new practices that can reconnect journalists to citizens. </p>
<p>These are the tasks that journalists need to take seriously if they are to restore relationships of trust with the public.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/155257/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Herman Wasserman 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>
To rebuild lost trust in the media will require more commitment and effort than just papering over ethical cracks.
Herman Wasserman, Professor of Media Studies in the Centre for Film and Media Studies, University of Cape Town
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/144303
2020-08-13T15:20:22Z
2020-08-13T15:20:22Z
Chasing 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 London
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/134962
2020-03-28T14:44:09Z
2020-03-28T14:44:09Z
It’s a bad idea for journalists to censor Trump – instead, they can help the public identify what’s true or false
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323707/original/file-20200327-146671-1w2glsg.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">President Donald Trump, flanked by administration and public health officials, during a briefing on the coronavirus on March 25.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/president-donald-trump-flanked-by-response-coordinator-for-news-photo/1208243080?adppopup=true">Getty/Mandel Ngan / AFP</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>In times of mortal strife, humans crave information more than ever, and it’s journalists’ responsibility to deliver it.</p>
<p>But what if that information is inaccurate, or could even kill people?</p>
<p>That’s the <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/03/media-orgs-wrestle-with-covering-trumps-campaign-rally-covid-19-briefings">quandary journalists have found themselves in</a> as they decide whether to cover President Donald J. Trump’s press briefings live. </p>
<p>Some television <a href="https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/article241453211.html">networks have started cutting away</a> from the briefings, saying the events are no more than campaign rallies, and that the <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/correcting-trumps-press-conference-misinformation/">president is spreading falsehoods</a> that endanger the public.</p>
<p>“If Trump is going to keep lying like he has been every day on stuff this important, we should, all of us, stop broadcasting it,” MSNBC’s <a href="https://twitter.com/MaddowBlog/status/1241184095302008835">Rachel Maddow tweeted</a>. “Honestly, it’s going to cost lives.”</p>
<p>News decisions and ethical dilemmas aren’t simple, but withholding information from the public is inconsistent with journalistic norms, and while well-meaning, could actually cause more harm than good in the long run. Keeping the president’s statements from the public prevents the public from being able to evaluate his performance, for example.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1241184095302008835"}"></div></p>
<h2>Truth and falsehood can fight it out</h2>
<p>The Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics, updated in 2014 during my term as president, states that the press must <a href="https://www.spj.org/pdf/spj-code-of-ethics.pdf">“seek truth and report it,”</a> while also minimizing harm. </p>
<p>When the president of the United States speaks, it matters – it is newsworthy, it’s history in the making. Relaying that event to the public as it plays out is critical for citizens, who can see and hear for themselves what their leader is saying, and evaluate the facts for themselves so that they may adequately self-govern.</p>
<p>That’s true even if leaders lie. Actually, it’s even more important when leaders lie.</p>
<p>Think of libertarian philosopher John Milton’s plea for <a href="https://firstamendmentwatch.org/history-speaks-essay-john-milton-areopagitica-1644/">the free flow of information and end of censorship</a> in 1600s England. Put it all out there and let people sort the lies from the truth, Milton urged: “<a href="http://www.gutenberg.org/files/608/608-h/608-h.htm">Let her and Falsehood grapple.</a>”</p>
<p>If a president spreads lies and disinformation, or minimizes health risks, then the electorate needs to know that to make informed decisions at the polls, perhaps to vote the person out to prevent future missteps. </p>
<p>Likewise, there’s a chance the president could be correct in his representation of at least some of the facts. </p>
<p>It’s not up to journalists to decide, but simply report what is said while providing additional context and facts that may or may not support what the president said.</p>
<p>Maddow is correct that journalists should not simply parrot information spoon fed by those in power to readers and viewers who might struggle to make sense of it in a vacuum. That is why it’s imperative journalists continuously challenge false and misleading statements, and trust the public to figure it out.</p>
<figure class="align-right zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=899&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323709/original/file-20200327-146712-oj2cfn.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=1130&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">During a crisis, people want to know what’s happening.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/man-sits-on-a-bench-reading-a-newspaper-with-tracking-the-news-photo/1215037687?adppopup=true">Getty/Cindy Ord</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Craving information</h2>
<p>Those who would urge the media’s censorship of the president’s speeches may feel they are protecting citizens from being duped, because they believe the average person can’t distinguish fact from fiction. <a href="http://cscc.scu.edu/trends/v24/v24_2.pdf">Communication scholars call this “third-person effect,”</a> where we feel ourselves savvy enough to identify lies, but think other more vulnerable, gullible and impressionable minds cannot.</p>
<p>It is understandable why journalists would try to protect the public from lies. That’s the “minimizing harm” part in the SPJ code of ethics, which is critical in these times, when inaccurate information <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/23/health/arizona-coronavirus-chloroquine-death/index.html">can put a person’s health at risk</a> – or cause them to make a fatal decision.</p>
<p>So how do journalists report the day’s events while minimizing harm and tamping down the spread of disinformation? Perhaps this can be accomplished through techniques already in use during this unorthodox presidential period:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Report the press briefings live for all to see, while providing live commentary and fact-checking, as <a href="https://www.politifact.com/article/2020/mar/15/live-fact-checking-biden-sanders-democratic-presid/">PolitiFact and others have done for live presidential debates</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>Fact-check the president after his talks, through <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/24/us/politics/trump-coronavirus-easter.html">contextual stories that provide the public accurate information</a>, in the media and <a href="https://www.factcheck.org/2020/03/trumps-statements-about-the-coronavirus/">through websites such as FactCheck.org</a>.</p></li>
<li><p>Call intentional mistruths what they are: <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2020/03/trumps-lies-about-coronavirus/608647/">Lies</a>. With this administration, journalists have become more willing to call intentional falsehoods “lies,” and that needs to continue, if not even more bluntly.</p></li>
<li><p>Develop a deep list of independent experts that can be on hand to counter misinformation as it is communicated.</p></li>
<li><p>Report transparently and openly, clearly identifying sources, providing supplemental documents online, and acknowledging limitations of information.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>The coronavirus pandemic is a critical time for the nation’s health and its democracy. Now, more than ever, we need information. As humans, we crave knowing what is going on around us, a basic “awareness instinct,” as termed by Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel in their foundational book, “<a href="https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is-journalism/elements-journalism/">The Elements of Journalism</a>.”</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=480&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/323749/original/file-20200328-146666-sfi6nx.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=603&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">On March 27, CNN provided live fact-checking of Trump’s statements during a coronavirus briefing.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Photo: Naomi Schalit</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>‘People aren’t dummies’</h2>
<p>Sometimes people don’t even realize they need information until after they have lost it.</p>
<p>In his <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=mOb4DAAAQBAJ&pg=PA221&lpg=PA221&dq=The+thing+I+missed+most+was+information+%E2%80%93+free,+uncensored,+undistorted,+abundant+information.&source=bl&ots=SeIfrRgY5X&sig=ACfU3U0V3uM0-kOi-CAWYFpGVtQ1fHO_gQ&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiEidTuq7voAhWhV98KHY1pBUAQ6AEwAXoECAkQAQ">autobiography, the late Sen. John McCain</a> wrote that upon his release after five years as a Vietnamese prisoner of war, the first thing he did when he got to a Philippines military base was order a steak dinner and stack of newspapers.</p>
<p>“I wanted to know what was going on in the world, and I grasped anything I could find that might offer a little enlightenment,” McCain wrote. “The thing I missed most was information – free, uncensored, undistorted, abundant information.”</p>
<p>People aren’t dummies. They can decipher good information from bad, as long as they have all the facts at their disposal.</p>
<p>And journalists are the ones best positioned to deliver it.</p>
<p>[<em>You need to understand the coronavirus pandemic, and we can help.</em> <a href="https://theconversation.com/us/newsletters?utm_source=TCUS&utm_medium=inline-link&utm_campaign=newsletter-text&utm_content=upper-coronavirus-help">Read our newsletter</a>.]</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/134962/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>David Cuillier is former president of the Society of Professional Journalists and currently president of the nonprofit National Freedom of Information Coalition, which provides education and research regarding citizen access to government information.</span></em></p>
Journalism’s ethics code says the press must ‘seek truth and report it,’ and also minimize harm. During a public health crisis, how should the press deal with President Trump’s inaccuracies and lies?
David Cuillier, Associate Professor, School of Journalism, University of Arizona
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/111474
2019-03-22T10:44:27Z
2019-03-22T10:44:27Z
Journalism needs to practice transparency in a different way to rebuild credibility
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265118/original/file-20190321-93057-1nzlv7.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Does the news business need a better definition of transparency?</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/editor/image/newspaper-journalist-backgrounds-766749757?ref=download">Shutterstock</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Public trust in media continues to hover <a href="https://news.gallup.com/poll/243665/media-trust-continues-recover-2016-low.aspx">near all-time lows</a>, <a href="https://www.knightfoundation.org/reports/indicators-of-news-media-trust">driven by perceptions</a> that the news industry is partisan and peddles inaccurate information (“fake news”), as well as ambivalence about news from social media. </p>
<p>According to a new Knight Foundation <a href="https://www.knightfoundation.org/reports/indicators-of-news-media-trust">report</a> on news media trust, transparency is a key factor in restoring trust.</p>
<p>Although <a href="https://www.poynter.org/archive/2007/online-journalism-ethics-guidelines-from-the-conference/">media organizations promote</a> the <a href="http://mediashift.org/2015/08/why-journalists-should-use-transparency-as-a-tool-to-deepen-engagement/">inherent value of transparency</a>, they often do not explain what it means in practice. </p>
<p>In contrast, research in business organizations points to a clearer meaning and more specific practices of transparency that, if applied to journalism, could help journalists regain greater public trust. </p>
<h2>What does transparency look like now?</h2>
<p>There are <a href="http://www.niemanlab.org/2017/12/transparency-finally-takes-off/">many definitions of transparency in journalism</a>.</p>
<p>The <a href="https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp">Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics</a> defines transparency as “explaining one’s decisions to the public.” The recent report from media funder the <a href="https://www.knightfoundation.org/reports/indicators-of-news-media-trust">Knight Foundation</a> referred to transparency in journalism as “disclosing potential conflicts of interest and making additional reporting material available to readers.”</p>
<p>Both of these definitions suggest that transparency should constitute some sort of explanation to the consumer about the decision-making involved in the story. </p>
<p>These could be in the form of editorial disclosures that would explain, for example, if there was reader backlash to a story, why an editor felt a story was newsworthy, like in the case of <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/reader-center/readers-accuse-us-of-normalizing-a-nazi-sympathizer-we-respond.html?module=inline">The New York Times profiling a white nationalist</a>. </p>
<p>Or they could be a longer “story behind the story,” published as a sidebar that explains both how and why a story was reported, <a href="https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/ywkg97/how-we-reported-this-story-dr">such as Vice News did</a> when covering ethnic cleansing in the Democratic Republic of Congo.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=299&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=299&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=299&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265213/original/file-20190321-93036-13vw9h1.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=376&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The editor’s note explaining how reporters worked on a Vice News investigation published in 2018.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/ywkg97/how-we-reported-this-story-drc">Vice News screenshot</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>In practice, however, transparency in journalism is most often treated as a simple transaction between news organizations and their audience. Two common examples are journalists hyperlinking to original data sources that provide evidence for a story’s claims or nonprofit journalism organizations listing their sponsors. </p>
<p>But research in organizational management shows that while both the explanation and disclosure aspects of transparency are important for building trust, they are not enough and they need to be coordinated. In fact, by practicing only a partial version of transparency, journalism may well be harming itself and further damaging the public’s trust in its work. </p>
<h2>Where transparency falls short</h2>
<p>Organizational scholars <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=EWv1UswAAAAJ&hl=en">Andrew Schnackenberg</a> and <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=dSaBZ8MAAAAJ&hl=en">Edward Tomlinson</a> have <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0149206314525202">proposed</a> that transparency in organizations actually consists of three parts: disclosure (information is released in a timely manner), accuracy (information is correct), and clarity (information is understandable in context by the intended audience). </p>
<p>To understand how this definition of transparency could help media organizations, consider a recent example where the media reported on a controversy without the benefit of all three elements.</p>
<p>Prompted by the revelation that <a href="https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/2/14/18217419/northam-yearbook-blackface-reeves">a Virginia governor’s 1984 yearbook page</a> had a photo of a man in blackface on it, USA Today recently released a story about <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/in-depth/news/investigations/2019/02/20/blackface-racist-photos-yearbooks-colleges-kkk-lynching-mockery-fraternities-black-70-s-80-s/2858921002/">racism in college yearbooks</a>. </p>
<p>Reporters reviewed over 900 yearbooks from 120 colleges and universities published over the past few decades for the story. The story that they wrote describes the pervasiveness of racist pictures in university yearbooks. (This article mentions a racist picture from our own university, <a href="http://www.rit.edu/">Rochester Institute of Technology</a>.) </p>
<p>USA Today also published a <a href="https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/investigations/2019/02/20/how-we-tracked-down-blackface-kkk-and-other-racist-yearbook-images/2915964002/">story behind the story</a>, whose stated purpose was “to be as transparent as possible about what we found.” The supplemental article described the process by which photos were identified and analyzed. </p>
<p>The supplemental story states: “We found questionable photos virtually everywhere we looked – what amounted to a montage of everyday, casual bigotry memorialized among pages that captured daily life on campuses. Many of the photos did not have captions, making it difficult in some cases to determine what was going on. It is possible that some were part of a school play or had other explanations. But we built our report around images that had little or no ambiguity.” </p>
<p>This supplemental story seems to be an attempt at providing some clarity about the main story by helping the reader understand the motivation and process for writing the main story. </p>
<p>The supplemental story, however, does not provide full clarity. There are no images of the offending photographs in their larger context within the yearbooks, for example. Similarly, the supplemental story lacks disclosure; there is no comprehensive list of the 900 yearbooks or the 120 schools surveyed. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=338&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=425&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265125/original/file-20190321-93028-1o292me.png?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"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">When CNN hired a former Trump administration flak, the network was strongly criticized.</span>
<span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.cnn.com/videos/media/2019/02/24/rs-cnns-hiring-of-ex-sessions-spokeswoman-stirs-controversy.cnn">CNN.com</a></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>We believe that providing clarity (examples in context) and disclosure (a list of sources) would allow readers to independently verify the data in the story.</p>
<p>In this example, using Schanckenberg and Tomlinson’s definition of transparency could have led to better journalism – to a story that readers could trust more fully. </p>
<h2>Competence, integrity, benevolence</h2>
<p>Drawing on <a href="https://www.jstor.org/journal/acadmanarevi?refreqid=excelsior%3A6fee62d7c1455e1a5239130efae4488e">earlier research about trust</a>, Schnackenberg and Tomlinson suggest that greater transparency can improve trustworthiness in organizations by helping to improve the public’s perception of their competence, integrity and benevolence. Those are the three key building blocks of trust.</p>
<p>What would this look like transferred from a traditional business to a news organization? </p>
<p>The news organization would report events in a way that is understandable and accurate and act according to its stated values, and its primary goal would be serving the public interest. </p>
<p>So when a news organization discloses – to the extent possible – its sources and own motivation for doing a story, it helps to build perceptions of integrity and benevolence. When it makes an effort to bring clarity and accuracy by explaining the overall context of a story, or when it provides insight into its own decision-making processes, it helps to build perceptions of competence and integrity.</p>
<h2>How not to do transparency</h2>
<p>To understand how the more nuanced definition of transparency borrowed from organizational business research can help news organizations build trust, consider the cable news network CNN. It <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/19/sessions-sarah-isgur-cnn-political-editor-1174527">recently hired Sarah Isgur Flores</a>, a spokesperson for former Attorney General Jeff Sessions, to lead its 2020 election coverage. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/20/business/media/sarah-isgur-flores-cnn.html?login=email&auth=login-email">As The New York Times noted</a>, Flores was hired as a “political editor, not a pundit, and departing an administration in which the president routinely criticizes the news media, including CNN.”</p>
<p>CNN’s own media reporter, <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/02/20/media/reliable-sources-02-19-19/index.html">Brian Stelter, wrote</a> about the hiring and <a href="https://theconversation.com/the-revolving-door-between-media-and-government-spins-again-with-cnns-hiring-of-sarah-isgur-flores-112159">the associated outcry about a political hack</a> being placed in charge of supposedly objective reporting. His reporting verified the <a href="https://www.politico.com/story/2019/02/19/sessions-sarah-isgur-cnn-political-editor-1174527">initial report from Politico</a>, and Stelter wrote about Flores’ previous employment in his lead. It was an attempt to bring transparency to CNN’s actions.</p>
<p>But CNN executives would not speak for attribution with Stelter to defend the hiring, instead preferring to provide anonymous responses. </p>
<p>So, while Stelter attempted to tell the “story behind the story,” he was rebuffed by his own network. </p>
<p>This was confusing for audiences trying to understand Flores’ hiring as a political editor. </p>
<p>If CNN had accepted a definition and practice of transparency that included accuracy, disclosure and clarity, perhaps they could have given better thought to how this hire would be perceived and how they might publicly comment on it. </p>
<p>In the end, <a href="https://www.thewrap.com/cnn-political-editor-to-serve-as-political-analyst-instead-after-backlash/">Flores announced</a> that she will be a political analyst instead of an editor – a change in title she, not CNN, initiated.</p>
<p>When an important concept like transparency is only partially applied, it leads to something of a transparency trap. Media organizations may believe they are acting transparently, but incomplete attempts at transparency may damage credibility and thus do more harm than good.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/111474/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>The authors do not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and have disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>
Trust in the news media is low. One way to regain that trust is better transparency, media experts say. But what does transparency mean? The field of organizational management may provide an answer.
Michael Palanski, Associate Professor of Management, Rochester Institute of Technology
Andrea Hickerson, Director of the School of Communication and Associate Professor of Journalism, Rochester Institute of Technology
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/113978
2019-03-21T20:55:21Z
2019-03-21T20:55:21Z
Government funding for journalism: To what end?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265117/original/file-20190321-93063-1ttksq2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Finance Minister Bill Morneau being interviewed after delivering a budget that promised financial aid for journalism.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The federal budget has finally answered some of the questions about the Liberal government’s plans to subsidize the news business, <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/news-industry-economic-update-1.4915113">which were first floated late last year</a>. But <a href="https://ipolitics.ca/2019/03/19/budget-2019-budget-reveals-details-of-governments-news-media-fund/">the details revealed by Finance Minister Bill Morneau</a> raises many more questions about Ottawa’s reasons for supporting journalism.</p>
<p>There will be a 25-per-cent refundable tax credit (up to $13,750 per employee) for those producing “original written news content.” Broadcasters, or any <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/periodical-fund.html">organization getting aid to publishers under the Canadian Periodical Fund</a>, will not be eligible for the tax credit.</p>
<p>Eligible recipients must be public corporations with shares traded on a Canadian stock exchange and controlled by Canadians. If not publicly traded, the company must be 75 per cent owned by Canadian citizens, incorporated and reside in Canada with 75 per cent of its directors Canadian citizens, and Canadians owning 75 per cent of any trust or partnership.</p>
<h2>Not for specialized publications</h2>
<p>Recipients must be general interest news publications not focused on a specific topic such as sports, business, entertainment or industry news. Yet it is precisely those specialized publications that are persuading audiences to pay for distinctive and high quality information online that has depth and can’t be found elsewhere.</p>
<p>As well, the publications must not be primarily promotional and must not have connections to any government or Crown corporation.</p>
<p>But there’s lots we don’t know, starting with some basic question that should be asked about any government subsidy: What is the objective? What are the results it is supposed to achieve?</p>
<p>It is obviously designed to assist traditional, general interest newspapers, but to do what? Keep them on life support and then what? Allow them to convert their print operations to digital? It’s notable that the budget did not designate eligible jobs as those directly related to digital transformation.</p>
<h2>No future for print</h2>
<p>Printed newspapers do not have a long-term future and <a href="https://montreal.ctvnews.ca/after-133-years-la-presse-publishes-final-print-edition-1.3740026">some historic titles in Canada have already made the switch to digital only</a>. Will a subsidy help print newspapers return to the good old days of large profits? Is print circulation growing at any newspaper in Canada?</p>
<p>These are all good questions to ask — and even better ones to answer before doing anything.</p>
<p>There’s lots more we don’t know.</p>
<p><a href="https://shatteredmirror.ca/">The problems of mainstream media have been coming for a long time</a>. The immediate crisis is the collapse of print and digital advertising to the benefit of Facebook and Google, which can offer targeted ads that costs a fraction of print advertising and also gives advertisers specific audience data. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/265119/original/file-20190321-93063-1i83r21.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Newspaper executives like Paul Godfrey of Postmedia have been asking for government assistance for years.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Nathan Dennette</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Circulation declining</h2>
<p>As advertising has disappeared, the audience must become the main source of funding for any news organization’s long-term survival. But <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/democracy-and-the-decline-of-newspapers/">circulation has also been declining everywhere for years</a> and <a href="https://www.statista.com/statistics/445586/regional-share-daily-newspaper-readership-age-canada/">few people under 30 read newspapers and aren’t about to start</a>.</p>
<p>Where do those audiences get the information they used to get from newspapers? Are they satisfied? What do they miss? We don’t know. If nothing, subsidies won’t fix that problem.</p>
<p>Similarly, the second government proposal — non-refundable tax credits up to $75 for subscribers to digital publications that meet the same Canadian rules as for labour subsidies — doesn’t solve anyone’s problem.</p>
<p>Boutique tax credits are bad tax policy. They don’t persuade people to do things they weren’t doing before. They overwhelmingly reward those who are already doing whatever the tax credit is designed to encourage. That’s why <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/childrens-fitness-tax-credit-cut-explained-1.4011081">the Trudeau government killed the children’s sports tax credit</a> and <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/did-trudeaus-budget-just-sock-it-to-transit-riders/article34394759/">the transit pass tax credit introduced by the Harper Conservative government</a>.</p>
<h2>Few pay for news</h2>
<p>More importantly, subscription tax credits don’t address the problem. Public opinion research in recent years has consistently shown that only <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/trust-in-the-news-is-substantially-up-in-canada/">about nine per cent of Canadians are prepared to pay for news online</a>. That’s because they see news available for free everywhere online and they have limited or no ability to differentiate between quality and commodity.</p>
<p>Lowering the monthly price of a subscription from $15 to $10 through a tax credit won’t change many minds about subscribing as long as the alternative for the audience is news for nothing.</p>
<p>The budget also lays out principles under which news organizations can become charitable institutions that would be able to grant tax receipts to donors. Time will tell if this is an effective idea.</p>
<p>Historically in the United States, First Amendment rights and related media issues have received broad philanthropic support — often from families that made their fortunes in the newspaper business. There is no comparable history in Canada, where philanthropy has been primarily directed to social, cultural and educational causes.</p>
<h2>What about the CBC?</h2>
<p>Finally, there is a large question that the Liberal government has consistently ignored.</p>
<p>What about the public broadcaster? What role does the federal government see for CBC/RadioCanada in all this? CBC/Radio Canada has already moved aggressively into the digital world, competing with newspapers online for news, opinion and — most important to the private sector — online advertising dollars.</p>
<p>Does the prospect of competing against the relatively deep pockets of the CBC prevent entrepreneurs from launching news start-ups in communities across the country? Should government place fences around the activities of the broadcaster it owns?</p>
<p>Until we know the answers to all these questions surrounding subsidies for the media, why do it?</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/113978/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Christopher Waddell is a professor at the School of Journalism and Communication at Carleton University and publisher of J-Source, a venture led by the journalism programs at Ryerson University and Carleton University and supported by the post-secondary journalism programs at member institutions of J- Schools Canada/EcolesJ (j-schoolscanada.ca) as well as by a group of donors.</span></em></p>
The newspaper industry has been asking the federal government for financial assistance for years. Now that Ottawa has revealed its plan, what purpose will it serve to sustain news organizations?
Christopher Waddell, Professor, School of Journalism and Communication, Carleton University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/108998
2019-03-20T12:58:44Z
2019-03-20T12:58:44Z
As Ottawa helps the news industry, latest research suggests journalists’ loyalties are tough to buy
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264761/original/file-20190319-60969-1cm4fpp.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Finance Minister Bill Morneau participates in TV interviews after tabling his budget, which included a $595 million financial package for news organizations. </span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Justin Tang</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Ottawa has finally announced the details of how it will offer <a href="https://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/liberals-unveil-tax-breaks-for-media-companies-and-subscribers">financial assistance to the country’s struggling news media industry</a> — a controversial policy that will lead to suggestions that <a href="https://nationalpost.com/opinion/andrew-coyne-liberals-600m-aid-package-for-news-media-will-irrevocably-politicize-the-press">journalistic independence is compromised by government funding.</a></p>
<p>Under a heading called <em>Support for Journalism</em>, Finance Minister Bill Morneau’s budget laid out three new measures: some journalism organizations will be allowed to issue charitable tax receipts to donors in a potential new source of revenue, a tax credit will offer a 25-per-cent refund on newsroom salaries and consumers will be able to claim a tax credit for digital news subscriptions.</p>
<p>The total projected cost of the financial package would be $595 million over five years. The aid will only be available to what the government has dubbed “qualified Canadian journalism organizations,” which will be recognized as such by “an independent panel.” How that panel <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/journalism-fund-tracker/">will be chosen</a> is just one of several obscure or questionable aspects of the government’s approach, likely to be at the centre of debate as this election year proceeds.</p>
<h2>A question of principle</h2>
<p>Underlying most of the arguments is a question of principle: If news organizations get government money, do journalists become government servants? </p>
<p>This question’s importance as it relates to freedom of the press cuts both ways.</p>
<p>On the one hand, there is no freedom of the press if the press does not exist, or if its existence hangs on a daily thread of avoiding bankruptcy. On the other, funding journalism fosters at best the appearance of a conflict of interest and at worst the tendency of pipers to pick tunes that please their payers. </p>
<p><a href="http://cwjs-ecmj.ca">Our research</a> offers reason to think that Canadian journalists’ loyalties cannot be bought as easily as some fear.</p>
<p>Rather, as we will report in a forthcoming issue of the <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/canadian-journal-of-political-science-revue-canadienne-de-science-politique"><em>Canadian Journal of Political Science</em></a>, most Canadian journalists express a collective sense of mission that requires them to be detached from those who provide their funding. Those sources of funding have long included <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/liberals-pledge-675-million-in-cbc-funding/article29354285/">corporate owners, advertisers</a>, and — for <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/periodical-fund.html">public broadcasters and magazines</a> — the public purse. </p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=417&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264766/original/file-20190320-60972-1ghtxun.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=524&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Canadian newspapers have struggled for years. The 2019 federal budget stated: ‘A strong and independent news media is crucial to a well-functioning democracy.’</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIANPRESS/Nathan Denette</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Identifying the journalist’s creed</h2>
<p>These findings come two decades after the launch of an influential turn-of-the-century study led by <a href="https://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/2388/2959">David Pritchard at the University of Wisconsin and Florian Sauvageau at Université Laval</a>, who identified a “Canadian journalists’ creed” of detached commitment to the accurate and impartial telling of public-interest stories. Follow-up work suggested that adherence to this “creed” was subject to variations according to language, region and media ownership, among other factors.</p>
<p><a href="https://shatteredmirror.ca">Much has changed</a> in the media landscape since the birth of social media platforms like Facebook in 2004, with news organizations’ revenues devastated by competition with free alternative sources of public information, resulting in buyouts and closures and a particular crisis in local news. </p>
<p>In the wake of these changes, we interviewed a random sample of 352 Canadian journalists, including freelancers and salaried journalists working in small, medium and large news organizations across Canada.</p>
<h2>Rating sources of influence</h2>
<p>We asked them to rate potential sources of influence including politicians, business representatives, audience feedback, social networks and, of course, the mandates of employers and expectations of shareholders. <a href="http://cca.kingsjournalism.com/?p=400">Their answers</a> strongly suggest that politicians, government officials and pressure groups are no more likely to influence their work today than at the end of the 20th century.</p>
<p>Instead, the journalists cited procedural matters as most influential on their work, especially ethical and legal constraints, limited time, the availability of news-gathering resources and access to information.</p>
<p>Journalists understand their role is to report on things as they are, educating their audiences, telling stories about the world and being detached observers. In addition, many believed their role to be one that especially scrutinizes politics and business and provides analysis of current affairs.</p>
<h2>Creed tied to identity</h2>
<p>What’s more, this enduring “creed” seems to be a stronger part of Canadian journalists’ professional identity than is true for peers in other democracies.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=396&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/264767/original/file-20190320-60949-1vtek0d.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=498&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The budget offers tax credits for readers who have digital news subscriptions.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Paul Chiasson</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Because we are part of the <a href="http://www.worldsofjournalism.org/country-reports/">Worlds of Journalism Study</a>, we were able to compare Canadians’ answers to those collected from more than 27,000 journalists in 66 other countries. When compared to their global peers, Canadian journalists report a stronger sense of being detached observers who report things as they are — and are significantly less likely to believe themselves to hold a collaborative role with the government. </p>
<p>Canadian journalists are also less likely than others to perceive themselves influenced by politicians, government officials and pressure groups and more influenced by journalism ethics.</p>
<p>Could this difference be ascribed to self-delusion or self-aggrandizement? Of course that’s possible, but there’s no theoretical basis for this to be more true in Canada than elsewhere. Social psychologists have demonstrated a <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0146167203254602">significant link</a> between people’s behaviour, their values and the norms of their milieu, and that they <a href="https://scholar.google.com/citations?user=NfD1P4EAAAAJ&hl=en">feel rewarded</a> when they act consistently with their beliefs. </p>
<p>Whether journalists demonstrably produce work that is consistent with their collective sense of mission is another question, which will be a focus of our next phase of research.</p>
<p>Journalists are far from immune to confusion and ambivalence in describing <a href="https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/107769900308000406">their roles</a> and <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1207/s15327728jmme1201_2">their ethics</a>. Yet, Canadian journalists’ accounts of their <a href="https://www.cjc-online.ca/index.php/journal/article/view/2929/2801">commitment to accuracy</a> stand as an enduring article of faith, in stark contrast to their apprehensions about procedural (including financial) stresses. </p>
<p>This, if nothing else, gives us reason to suspect that a little extra financial security will aid, more than hinder, news people’s determination to remain independent monitors of power.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/108998/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This project was funded by a SSHRC Insight Grant.</span></em></p>
The federal budget has offered several initiatives to help Canada’s ailing news industry. Does that mean journalists will be compromised by government handouts? New research suggests they won’t.
Heather Rollwagen, Associate Professor of Sociology, Toronto Metropolitan University
Ivor Shapiro, Professor, School of Journalism, Toronto Metropolitan University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/107435
2018-11-25T17:23:16Z
2018-11-25T17:23:16Z
Funding journalism means defining who’s a journalist – not a bad thing
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247073/original/file-20181123-149338-u0lkv5.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Canadian government wants to offer financial assistance to the news industry. How will it define what's journalism?</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>The federal government’s recent announcement of <a href="https://www.budget.gc.ca/fes-eea/2018/docs/statement-enonce/chap02-en.html#s2">financial support for news organizations</a> has been met with understandably wide-ranging reactions — from relief to skepticism, and worse. </p>
<p>Among other measures, the package will incentivize consumers to sign up for digital news subscriptions and subsidize publishers through a tax credit on salaries paid to journalists.</p>
<p>It’s good news for imperilled news businesses, but even some who share the government’s expressed concern over the sustainability of independent information about public affairs have expressed <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/heres-what-the-journalism-industry-has-to-say-about-morneaus-600-million-bailout/">misgivings</a>. The doubters include many journalists — the very people who stand most to gain from the promised support. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1065367611674783744"}"></div></p>
<p>So what gives? It’s all about definition — and independence. </p>
<p>The argument for taxpayer subsidies rests on an immutable truth: It’s become tough, and sometimes impossible, to turn a profit by providing communities with verified information about public affairs.</p>
<h2>People want free info</h2>
<p>People want information to come free, like so much on the internet, and the economics of online advertising favours <a href="https://nmc-mic.ca/news/research/google-and-facebook-continue-to-dominate-the-canadian-digital-advertising-market/">Facebook and Google</a> over news providers. </p>
<p>This is a problem, according to Ottawa’s fall economic update, because:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>“A strong and independent news media is crucial to a well-functioning democracy. It empowers citizens by providing them with the information they need to make informed decisions on important issues, and also serves to hold powerful institutions — including governments — to account by bringing to light information that might not otherwise be made available to the public.” </p>
</blockquote>
<p>Principled counter-arguments to the government’s plan, however, likewise hinge on a perceived threat to the independence of a free press. To explain, here’s a deceptively simple political-philosophy pop quiz.</p>
<p>Which of the following statements is true?</p>
<p>● Democracy functions best when the relationship of journalists and governments is one of tension, rather than interdependence.</p>
<p>● In a healthy democracy, governments today need to spend taxpayer money to sustain a free and independent press.</p>
<p>● Freedom of the press means that no one needs the government’s permission to produce and publish journalism.</p>
<p>The answer may be “all of the above,” because contrary to first appearances, the three statements aren’t contradictory. </p>
<h2>Public support isn’t new</h2>
<p>The United Kingdom, for example, is arguably home to the world’s rowdiest, most indomitable reporters and editors. Thousands of that country’s journalists benefit from a legislated universal tax (the so-called <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/9637e45d-c96c-36c6-9e3f-af141e81cab4">radio licence</a>) that’s kept BBC’s news division vigorous enough to boast a <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2018/bbc-global-audience">global digital audience</a> nearly 10 times bigger than Canada’s entire population.</p>
<p>Closer to home, the federal government has long provided <a href="https://www.canada.ca/en/canadian-heritage/services/funding/periodical-fund.html">grants</a> to magazines both newsy and not, but not to daily papers, private broadcasters or news websites. And hundreds of journalism
jobs at <a href="https://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/liberals-pledge-675-million-in-cbc-funding/article29354285/">CBC-Radio Canada</a> depend for their continuance on the largesse (or <a href="https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cbc-budget-cut-by-115m-over-3-years-1.1147096">otherwise</a>) of annual federal
budgets, because there’s no Canadian equivalent to the BBC’s longer-term legislated assurance.</p>
<h2>Who’s a journalist?</h2>
<p>Now, the government plans to extend public-purse subsidies directly to the salaries of privately employed journalists. </p>
<p>But who and what is a journalist? This question has stumped some tough minds over the years, including that of former Chief Justice Beverly McLaughlin.</p>
<p>In 2009, she wrote <a href="https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/7837/index.do">a landmark libel judgment</a> that lit a cherished green light for investigative reporters by holding them accountable for the fairness of their methods, rather than demanding literal truth of every word. The new protocol was based on a British precedent that lawyers call <a href="https://rrj.ca/the-law-of-responsible-journalism/defence">“responsible journalism.”</a></p>
<p>This straightforward moniker succinctly captured “the essence of the defence,” McLaughlin allowed, but instead of citing the term “responsible journalism,” she chose a markedly clunkier name for Canada’s version: “Responsible communication in the public interest.” </p>
<p>Why? Because “the traditional media are rapidly being complemented by new ways of communicating on matters of public interest, many of them online, which do not involve journalists.” </p>
<h2>Dearth of local news</h2>
<p>So, Chief Justice, one might ask — what is a journalist? On this, McLaughlin declined to pass judgment.</p>
<p>In 2011, the problem of defining journalists scuppered the country’s first substantial proposal of government support for news media. Laval University Prof. Dominique Payette delivered a <a href="http://www.mcc.gouv.qc.ca/index.php?id=3355&tx_lesecrits_pi1%5Becrit%5D=592&cHash=10a75996d801a5fb86c6a10b2fe460ac">carefully researched and well-argued report</a> to the government of Québec describing a crisis in the availability of local news that escaped attention in the rest of Canada until some years later.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=404&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247085/original/file-20181124-149308-i7tdut.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=507&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A proposal for government to legally recognize the profession of journalism was first proposed in Québec in 2011, but the idea was met with derision from many journalists.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Graham Hughes</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Payette recommended legal recognition of professional status for journalists and taxpayer-funded benefits to organizations that employ members of this order. </p>
<h2>Shot down in Québec</h2>
<p>The idea was initially welcomed by Québec’s government and by many journalists, but eventually got dropped due to <a href="http://j-source.ca/article/titre-professionnel-on-ne-peut-pas-renoncer-pour-de-si-mauvaises-raisons-dominique-payette/">a fractious debate </a> among journalists about how it could be implemented. Opinion among anglophone journalists, meanwhile, was solidly <a href="https://montrealgazette.com/news/new-rules-for-quebec-journalists-are-a-bad-idea/wcm/c9b098a6-503d-45a0-8d0c-a393198379ac">dismissive</a> — many persisted in misunderstanding the proposal as implying a required “licence” for practising journalism.</p>
<p>Coincidentally, around that time, my research was focused on a search for signs of consensus about what defines journalism. But the only consensus to be found was that a definition was neither needed nor wanted. </p>
<p>For most Canadian journalists, a free press means anyone should legally be allowed to describe their work as journalism. End of story. </p>
<h2>Drawing distinctions</h2>
<p>When I published my theory-building paper on the topic in 2014, I was careful to defer to the prevailing inclusive point of view. I made the case for <a href="https://doi.org/10.1080/1461670X.2014.882483">defining journalism</a> with reference to, among other things, the <em>work</em> of “independent” discovery. As for defining journalists (the workers rather than the work), my argument discreetly evaded its own obvious conclusion — if journalism can be defined, then a journalist is simply a person who practises journalism. </p>
<p>The inclusive position will no longer be tenable once the government offers tax breaks to companies that employ journalists. The government proposes to establish “an independent panel” to “define and promote core journalism standards, define professional journalism, and determine eligibility.” And who will be on this vital panel of definers? Journalists, of course. </p>
<p>Circularity aside, this might be viable as a short-term pragmatic solution. Most appointees to the independent panel will likely be current or former minions of legacy news brands, disinclined to recognize traces of their traditions in nimbler, edgier upstarts aimed at unconventional audiences.</p>
<figure class="align-center ">
<img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=444&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/247086/original/file-20181124-149341-1jc57oh.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=557&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px">
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">Paul Godfrey, CEO of Postmedia Network, Canada’s largest newspaper company, has joined other publishers in lobbying Ottawa for financial assistance. Godfrey has in turn been criticized for giving himself large bonuses while laying off journalists across the country.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">THE CANADIAN PRESS/Nathan Denette</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>But attention to diversity and terms of appointment will foster open minds and a sense of fairness. So too will a clear mandate, crafted through non-partisan consultation that favours neutral criteria, perhaps including membership of either the francophone <a href="https://conseildepresse.qc.ca">Québec</a> media council or its anglophone <a href="http://mediacouncil.ca">national</a> counterpart. </p>
<p>But long-term, there is a more intuitive and less compromising way by which professions “define” themselves, set “standards” and determine “eligibility” for government recognition.</p>
<h2>A time for self-regulation</h2>
<p>This more conventional system for managing professional recognition works well enough for <a href="http://www.peo.on.ca/">engineers</a>, <a href="http://glcanada.org/resources/practicing-in-canada/governing-bodies/">lawyers</a>, <a href="https://www.scc.ca/en/accreditation/product-process-and-service-certification/regulatory-advisory-councils">plumbers</a> and many others.</p>
<p>Governance for these professions and trades does not involve government-appointed panels, whose own biases must eventually collude or collide with those of their effective employers to foster actual distrust or subtle corruption.</p>
<p>Rather, these other socially important professionals are governed by their peers in legally recognized official bodies usually known as colleges or institutes. Their central goal: To protect the integrity and independence of their profession. </p>
<p>The system is called self-regulation and it already applies to journalists in <a href="http://www.ccijp.net">France</a>, <a href="http://www.odg.it">Italy</a> and many other industrialized <a href="https://ethicaljournalismnetwork.org/resources/publications/trust-factor/introduction">democracies</a> that boast markedly undeferential news cultures. </p>
<p>If self-regulation came to Canada, journalists choosing to enrol would not morph into humble servants, ready to trade away their constitutionally guaranteed freedoms. And those same freedoms would continue to protect, likewise, the right of conscientious non-registrants
to publish news (whether verified or fake).</p>
<p>In short, a system of self-regulation could do no harm and much good. Mostly, it would simply recognize the plain reality that journalists’ work is vital enough to foster, distinct enough to define, and, today more than ever, vulnerable enough to defend.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/107435/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>This article is in part the fruit of research funded by a SSHRC Insight Grant and of previous research on media accountability funded by Newspapers Canada and Mitacs, which recommended and led to to establishment of the National Newsmedia Council. As a journalism professor, Ivor Shapiro also acknowledges working for an institution that could benefit from enhanced public recognition of journalism as a profession. </span></em></p>
The Canadian government has announced a new policy of providing financial assistance to the country’s news industry. With any financial support will come a need to define who exactly is a journalist.
Ivor Shapiro, Professor, School of Journalism, Toronto Metropolitan University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/105239
2018-10-21T08:11:13Z
2018-10-21T08:11:13Z
South African journalism’s problems are bigger than ethics: they’re about ethos
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/241421/original/file-20181019-105751-apog7i.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">South African journalism is in the spotlight.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">AlexLMX/Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When the editor of the Sunday Times in South Africa, Bongani Siqoko, published an <a href="https://www.timeslive.co.za/sunday-times/news/2018-10-13-we-got-it-wrong-and-for-that-we-apologise/">apology</a> in the newspaper earlier this month he surely set a new precedent in the country’s journalism.</p>
<p>The apology went far beyond correcting a mistake or retracting a story. In effect, it told readers that a specialist investigative unit within the newspaper was so manipulated by its sources that some of its reports contributed to devious efforts to overthrow proper, accountable governance in the country. </p>
<p>That’s a whopping admission. It also comes against <a href="http://www.politicsweb.co.za/news-and-analysis/where-the-sunday-times-went-wrong">a background</a> of similar retractions and apologies by the paper. Siqoko’s retraction covers activities going back to 2011. This means that in the last decade three editors are implicated in presiding over a newsroom that has serially produced damaging journalism of the worst calibre.</p>
<p>Media coverage of this latest round has framed the story as a failure of ethics. This certainly is the case, but I think it goes much deeper and much wider. I would frame it as a matter of ethos. Ethos is the grounding out of which we operate, the base values and commitments that give character to our pursuits and credibility to our endeavours.</p>
<p>Certainly, it’s an opportune moment to consider journalistic ethics: the use of anonymous, and perhaps shady, sources; the right of reply given to affected people; diligent verification of leaked information; and the need for high suspicion about the motives of intelligence sources.</p>
<p>But the question still remains: how did the Sunday Times investigative team get it so wrong when others didn’t? Why were they saying yes when other journalists were <a href="http://www.702.co.za/articles/321581/listen-news-media-has-an-ethical-contract-with-the-society-songezo-zibi">saying no</a> to the same sources? </p>
<p>This catastrophic failure in media production, accountability and credibility needs a special inquiry. The South African National Editors’ Forum <a href="https://ewn.co.za/2018/10/17/sanef-launches-probe-into-sunday-times-scandal">has promised to look into this</a>. But my feeling is that this level of complicity – even if it was unwitting on the journalists’ part – is on the same level as that which provoked the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s <a href="http://www.justice.gov.za/trc/report/finalreport/Volume%204.pdf">investigation</a> into the media under apartheid. </p>
<p>The commission asked whether the media had provided a “cloud of cover” which allowed the National Party regime to perpetrate gross abuses and even to use journalists to further a dirty war against anti-apartheid organisations and individuals.</p>
<h2>Tough questions</h2>
<p>Journalist Stephan Hofstatter (who along with another member of the investigative team Mzilikazi wa Afrika have left the Sunday Times) was recently ambushed <a href="https://mybroadband.co.za/forum/threads/paul-osullivan-issues-ultimatum-to-sunday-times-to-retract-fake-stories.981897/">at the launch of a book</a> he’s just had published by people asking him to account for his part in the bogus stories. He responded with several points, including that:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>The team was put under enormous pressure to keep on producing scoops. This meant they didn’t devote the time needed to proper checking;</p></li>
<li><p>He neglected to give “proper context” to the contestation around the issues he was reporting;</p></li>
<li><p>He was not transparent enough about the gaps in his knowledge;</p></li>
<li><p>The unit did not always contact everyone affected for right of reply; and </p></li>
<li><p>That up to nine people at a time were working on a story (including the editors).</p></li>
</ul>
<p>It’s these and other issues that an inquiry would need to address. </p>
<h2>Apartheid precedents</h2>
<p>The degree of misuse of media by partisan intelligence operatives suggested by the Sunday Times’s situation has only one precedent in South African history – the apartheid state. </p>
<p>In the wider world context of <a href="https://www.cjr.org/analysis/algorithm-russia-facebook.php">bot-engineered fake news</a> and the <a href="http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/fandd/2001/09/hellman.htm">interference in state governance</a> by oligarchs hell-bent on extraction of resources and money from vulnerable countries like South Africa, a focused forum is needed to ask some big questions about journalism in the public interest and its future. </p>
<p>South Africa learnt a lot from the Truth and Reconciliation Commission’s investigation about how media can be captured. And those lessons helped shape the post-apartheid news terrain with journalists and editors examining the relationship between media and government and working out a healthier relationship through discussion and honesty. </p>
<p>Now South Africans need to know how to proof journalism against fake news in the post-apartheid era. </p>
<p>Those sitting at university journalism schools must also learn from what has happened. How do we impart a good set of ethics to our students? Also, how do we root them in an ethos that gives them the resources which will enable them to clearly see how things can go badly wrong?</p>
<h2>Important lessons</h2>
<p>These are some of the issues we must deal with when teaching future journalists.</p>
<p>First, scoops in themselves are dangerous territory which invoke ego for the journalist and high stakes for the media outlet. This heady sense of importance is a perilous place to be; journalists as well as their subject matter need to be subjected to hard questions. Pearlie Joubert who resigned from the Sunday Times in protest against the kind of stories being written, has <a href="http://www.capetalk.co.za/articles/321406/i-resigned-from-sunday-times-because-i-couldn-t-breathe-pearlie-joubert">spoken</a> about the “macho” attitude of the journalists involved. </p>
<p>Another colleague, Buddy Naidu, has also <a href="https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2018-10-18-the-sunday-times-furore-no-checks-no-balances-no-credibility/">mentioned</a> their “precious behaviour” and lack of accountability to the newsroom process.</p>
<p>Also, the size and urgency of the scoop must never pre-empt the hard, dogged work of verification. And it’s crucial that the editors and subeditors be empowered to ask hard questions. </p>
<p>Finally, as former Business Day editor Songezo Zibi <a href="http://www.702.co.za/articles/321581/listen-news-media-has-an-ethical-contract-with-the-society-songezo-zibi">has said</a>, news journalists have an ethical contract with society. </p>
<p>This is a non-negotiable dimension of news journalism, especially for those working in investigative journalism. The mindset that thinks beyond the story and the prestige of the outlet to the broader impact on society, is critical.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/105239/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Anthea Garman receives funding from the National Research Foundation. </span></em></p>
South African editors and journalists failed in their ethical contract with society.
Anthea Garman, Associate Professor of Journalism and Media Studies, Rhodes University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/103243
2018-10-10T22:42:43Z
2018-10-10T22:42:43Z
Media Files: Guardian Australia’s Katharine Murphy and former MP David Feeney on the digital disruption of media and politics
<p>Today on Media Files, a podcast about the major issues in the media, we’re taking a close look at the role of the news media in politics.</p>
<p>As the Wentworth by-election looms, we’re asking: is digital disruption changing the rules of journalism and politics in Australia?</p>
<p>It is easy to miss how disorienting it can be to work in the always-on-at-fire-hydrant-strength world of political journalism these days, as Guardian Australia’s political editor Katharine Murphy recounts in her recent essay-book <a href="https://www.mup.com.au/books/on-disruption-paperback-softback">On Disruption</a>. Matthew Ricketson speaks with her to understand the media’s role (if any) in the political turmoil that cost Malcolm Turnbull the prime ministership, triggering this month’s hotly contested by-election.</p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/media-files-spotlights-walter-v-robinson-and-the-newcastle-heralds-chad-watson-on-covering-clergy-abuse-and-the-threats-that-followed-102564">Media Files: Spotlight's Walter V. Robinson and the Newcastle Herald's Chad Watson on covering clergy abuse - and the threats that followed</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>One person who’s seen up close the sometimes difficult relationship between reporters and politicians is former federal Labor MP David Feeney. </p>
<p>Speaking to Andrea Carson about falling media trust and increased political polarisation, he asks: “In today’s Australia, where do you have a public conversation? Because there are so many different filter bubbles, there are no agreed facts… we are losing the capacity to build a consensus.” </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/media-files-what-does-the-nine-fairfax-merger-mean-for-diversity-and-quality-journalism-102189">Media Files: What does the Nine Fairfax merger mean for diversity and quality journalism?</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Media Files is produced by a team of journalists and academics who have spent decades working in and reporting on the media industry. They’re passionate about sharing their understanding of the media landscape, especially how journalists operate, how media policy is changing, and how commercial manoeuvres and digital disruption are affecting the kinds of media and journalism we consume.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/au/podcasts/mediafiles">Media Files</a> will be out every month, with occasional off-schedule episodes released when we’ve got fresh analysis we can’t wait to share with you. To make sure you don’t miss an episode, find us and <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/media-files/id1434250621">subscribe on Apple Podcasts</a>, in <a href="https://play.pocketcasts.com/">Pocket Casts</a> or wherever you find your podcasts. And while you’re there, please rate and review us - it really helps others to find us.</p>
<p>You can find more podcast episodes from The Conversation <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/podcast-3738">here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<p><em>Recorded at the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Advancing Journalism. Producer: Andy Hazel.</em></p>
<h2>Additional audio</h2>
<p>Theme music by Susie Wilkins.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/103243/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrea Carson is part of a research group that receives funding from the Australian Research Council where she is a chief investigator using big data to study public policy making in Australia.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Matthew Ricketson receives funding from the Australian Research Council for two projects on which he is a chief investigator. He is president of the Journalism Education and Research Association of Australia (JERAA) and is the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance's (MEAA) representative on the Australian Press Council.</span></em></p>
Today on the podcast we're talking filter bubbles, fake news, opinion vs fact. Media Files asks two experts how the media and politics influence each other - and why that's causing concern.
Andrea Carson, Incoming Associate Professor at LaTrobe University. Former Lecturer, Political Science, School of Social and Political Sciences; Honorary Research Fellow, Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
Matthew Ricketson, Professor of Communication, Deakin University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/102564
2018-09-05T20:06:46Z
2018-09-05T20:06:46Z
Media Files: Spotlight’s Walter V. Robinson and the Newcastle Herald’s Chad Watson on covering clergy abuse - and the threats that followed
<p>If you’ve seen the movie Spotlight, about the Boston Globe investigative reporters who uncovered the staggering extent of child sexual abuse in the Catholic Church in the US, you’re already familiar with the work of <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/staff/robinson">Walter V. Robinson</a>. He’s the one played by Michael Keaton in the film.</p>
<p>In today’s episode of Media Files - a podcast about the media and how it works - Robinson shares some insights into where the Spotlight investigation began: from scratch.</p>
<p>“I mean, we made our living doing mostly stories about government corruption and malfeasance and we didn’t have a single file anywhere in all of our file cabinets that had the word ‘priest’ or ‘church’,” he says in today’s episode of Media Files. </p>
<p>“I said, look, let’s do this: let’s assemble a list of everybody we can think of who’s ever had anything to do with this sexual abuse of children in Massachusetts and let’s call them all and see what we can find out.”</p>
<p>The initial trickle of leads would soon turn into a flood.</p>
<p>“We had 300 victims just in Boston alone who contacted us in the first two or three weeks after we published,” he said, adding that, for many, “we were the first people they had ever told and they all thought that they were the only ones that this had ever happened to.”</p>
<figure>
<iframe width="440" height="260" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/9c4JIgEDOjQ?wmode=transparent&start=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen=""></iframe>
<figcaption><span class="caption">The trailer for the film Spotlight.</span></figcaption>
</figure>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/review-spotlights-revealing-story-of-child-abuse-in-my-home-town-and-maybe-yours-53955">Review: Spotlight's revealing story of child abuse in my home town – and maybe yours</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>As Australia’s <a href="https://www.childabuseroyalcommission.gov.au/">Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse</a> has now made clear, the horrors the Spotlight team uncovered were not a uniquely US problem. </p>
<p>Australian journalist Chad Watson was editing the Newcastle Herald on the day investigative reporter Joanne McCarthy filed a <a href="https://www.theherald.com.au/story/207615/there-will-be-a-royal-commission-because-there-must-be/">column</a> that contained a chillingly prescient line.</p>
<p>“Part of that column was the line, ‘There will be a royal commission into clergy abuse in Australia because there must be’. I remember reading that line before we went to print and I thought, ‘Yep, tomorrow I’ll talk to Joanne about that’,” Watson says on Media Files.</p>
<p>“And at that stage, Joanne had been writing about clergy abuse for 10 years; she had probably written 500 stories about it. And we thought, well, what are we going to do about it?”</p>
<p>McCarthy’s reporting, published while Watson was editor of the Newcastle Herald, lit the fuse that led to the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse. Watson told Media Files there were endless challenges along the way.</p>
<p>“We had legal threats from the Catholic Church. We had priests from the pulpit mentioning the Newcastle Herald. I was actually in mass myself - and now I don’t go to church much anymore - when the priest mentioned that there was a statement at the back of the church to be collected about reports in the Newcastle Herald,” he said. “And I have had friendships fracture.”</p>
<p>In today’s episode of Media Files, we talk about the challenges in covering clergy abuse, how media outlets handle accusations against people who have since died and how journalists work with vulnerable survivors of abuse. </p>
<hr>
<p>
<em>
<strong>
Read more:
<a href="https://theconversation.com/how-investigative-journalists-are-using-social-media-to-uncover-the-truth-66393">How investigative journalists are using social media to uncover the truth</a>
</strong>
</em>
</p>
<hr>
<p>Media Files is produced by a team of journalists and academics who have spent decades working in and reporting on the media industry. They’re passionate about sharing their understanding of the media landscape, especially how journalists operate, how media policy is changing, and how commercial manoeuvres and digital disruption are affecting the kinds of media and journalism we consume.</p>
<p><a href="https://theconversation.com/au/podcasts/mediafiles">Media Files</a> will be out every month, with occasional off-schedule episodes released when we’ve got fresh analysis we can’t wait to share with you. To make sure you don’t miss an episode, find us and <a href="https://itunes.apple.com/au/podcast/media-files/id1434250621">subscribe on Apple Podcasts</a>, in <a href="https://play.pocketcasts.com/">Pocket Casts</a> or wherever you find your podcasts. And while you’re there, please rate and review us - it really helps others to find us.</p>
<p>You can find more podcast episodes from The Conversation <a href="https://theconversation.com/au/topics/podcast-3738">here</a>.</p>
<hr>
<ul>
<li>Suicide Call Back Service: 1300 659 467</li>
<li>Lifeline 24-hour counselling: 13 11 14</li>
<li>Mental Health Crisis Helpline in each state and territory.</li>
</ul>
<hr>
<p><em>Recorded at the University of Melbourne’s Centre for Advancing Journalism. Producer: Andy Hazel and Gavin Nebauer.</em></p>
<h2>Additional audio</h2>
<p>Theme music by Susie Wilkins.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/102564/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Andrew Dodd 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 this episode, we hear from Walter V. Robinson on how the Boston Globe Spotlight investigation into clergy abuse began, and from the Newcastle Herald's Chad Watson on how his paper covered abuse.
Andrew Dodd, Director of the Centre for Advancing Journalism, The University of Melbourne
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/100605
2018-07-30T13:54:25Z
2018-07-30T13:54:25Z
How peace journalism can help the media cover elections in Africa
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/229634/original/file-20180727-106524-1l7k42k.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Voting in the presidential run-off elections in Mali, recently.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">EPA/Tanya Bindra</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Several countries in Africa, including Zimbabwe, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Cameroon, hold crucial elections this year. Some of the polls are likely to be marked by protests as well as clampdowns on dissenting voices as well as the news media and internet access. All this amid the spread of <a href="https://portland-communications.com/pdf/How-Africa-Tweets-2018.pdf">fake news</a>. </p>
<p>It’s important to consider the role of the media in this heady mix.</p>
<p>A great deal of attention has been paid to the role of the media in <a href="https://www.sfcg.org/articles/media_for_conflict_prevention.pdf">instigating, maintaining, and exacerbating violence</a> through their news coverage. War and conflict <a href="https://www.macmillanihe.com/page/detail/the-media-at-war-susan-l-carruthers/?sf1=barcode&st1=9780230244566">sell and make the headlines</a>. </p>
<p>And, the news media are predisposed to using frames and a language that conform to what peace scholar Johan Galtung has labelled <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01296612.2003.11726720">“war journalism”</a>. This is reporting that emphasises conflict over peaceful resolutions, differing viewpoints over common ground, and sensationalism over depth and context. The result is that audiences are given the impression that conflict is inevitable, and that peace or conflict resolution are beyond reach.</p>
<p>This can also happen during the coverage of elections when a great many things can go wrong leading to best practice and ethics being overlooked. When this happens the media can be party to <a href="http://www.undp.org/content/dam/brussels/docs/Other/JTF%202011.06_Summary_report-Barcelona_workshop_Elections&conflict.pdf">exacerbating conflict and violence</a>. </p>
<p>A different approach is therefore required. The media are responsible for reporting accurately and efficiently on different political parties, candidates, political party programmes and policies. This also extends to providing platforms for debate between contesting parties as well as forums for discussions with the public.</p>
<p>A few simple criteria can be used to judge whether or not the media are doing a good job. How balanced and fair are they in their coverage. Are all parties getting a fair share of coverage? Are the media playing a role in monitoring fair play by all parties before, during and after elections? And are the results covered fairly?</p>
<p>The media can play a role in creating <a href="https://www.idea.int/data-tools/tools/electoral-risk-management-tool">peaceful and non-violent elections</a>. They can do so by following some simple approaches set out under the alternative model of <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01296612.2003.11726720">peace journalism</a>. This puts emphasis on conflict resolution, analysis of the underlying causes of conflict, the use of alternative news sources, and the use of language that doesn’t over-emphasise or play up conflict. </p>
<h2>Where the media has played a negative role</h2>
<p>The media were implicated in fuelling violence in the <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-the-media-covered-kenyas-general-election-82324">Kenyan elections in 2007-2008</a>, playing up divisions between the two main contesting coalitions parties and their candidates. Importantly, the Kenyan media failed to mitigate hate speech, spreading violent imagery pitting communities against one another. </p>
<p>Equally, the media were implicated in the controversies surrounding the controversial <a href="https://www.dw.com/en/election-observers-in-zambia-report-media-biased-in-vote/a-19473207">Zambian presidential elections in 2016</a>. They were accused of waging a propaganda war, with the private media backing opposition parties, and the public media supporting the governing Patriotic Front party and its incumbent candidate, President Edward Lungu.</p>
<p>In Africa, biased media coverage in favour of incumbent presidents has been cited as among the reasons voters have little faith that <a href="https://theconversation.com/why-the-role-of-the-media-is-so-important-to-free-and-fair-elections-in-africa-77568">elections are credible</a>, and the outcomes legitimate.</p>
<p>Here, social media, and Twitter in particular, have reinforced the role that the media play as a force for both <a href="https://www.vox.com/world/2017/12/8/16690352/social-media-war-facebook-twitter-russia">good and bad in elections</a>. No more evident is this through the spread of <a href="https://theconversation.com/a-vicious-online-propaganda-war-that-includes-fake-news-is-being-waged-in-zimbabwe-99402">fake news</a>. </p>
<p>How can elections be covered differently?</p>
<h2>Doing things differently</h2>
<p>The media can play a role in creating <a href="https://www.idea.int/data-tools/tools/electoral-risk-management-tool">peaceful and non-violent elections</a>. Research <a href="https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/365">shows</a> that journalists are well aware of the pitfalls of playing up conflict at the detriment of conflict resolution. There is an openness to change, and to adopt new reporting practices, including entirely new models of journalism. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01296612.2003.11726720">Peace journalism</a> has been highlighted as such an alternative model because it emphasises conflict resolution, analysis of the underlying causes of conflict, the use of alternative news sources, and the use of language that does not over-emphasise or play up conflict. </p>
<p>But peace journalism has also been <a href="http://www.cco.regener-online.de/2007_2/pdf/loyn_reply.pdf">criticised</a> for being too philosophical and idealistic. In some instances critics have likened it to “sunshine journalism”. Foremost, it’s the model’s practical application and implementation that has been queried.</p>
<p>So, can the peace journalism model work?</p>
<p><a href="http://connection.ebscohost.com/c/articles/83770208/reframing-south-african-tv-news-as-peace-journalism-interim-findings-from-field-experiment">Research </a> in South Africa shows that audiences who were shown television news inserts reworked according to the peace journalism model, were more likely to pick up on as well as understand the underlying causes of conflict and to see opportunities for conflict resolution; rather than seeing conflict as inevitable and without any chance of being resolved.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.cco.regener-online.de/2007_1/pdf/lynch.pdf">Research</a> from the Philippines and the Middle East shows similar results. </p>
<h2>Solutions</h2>
<p><a href="https://www.cogitatiopress.com/mediaandcommunication/article/view/365">Research</a> among journalists shows that they are well aware of the many pitfalls of covering conflict. But they also argue that it’s not their role to act as “peacemakers”. </p>
<p>That said, there is agreement that <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/23736992.2015.1020379">journalism practices could be changed</a> to reflect alternative views, thus showing that consensus or common ground can exist, even between two warring or opposing factions. </p>
<p>It seems peace journalism provides a good model for reflection and for training journalists to be more sensitive when <a href="http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/1750635210378944?journalCode=mwca">reporting on conflict</a>.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100605/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ylva Rodny-Gumede 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 Africa, biased media coverage is one of the reasons voters have little faith in credible elections.
Ylva Rodny-Gumede, Professor of Journalism in the Department of Journalism, Film and Television, University of Johannesburg
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/100118
2018-07-18T09:50:03Z
2018-07-18T09:50:03Z
Why the BBC ties itself in knots over ‘balance’ – clue: it’s the licence fee
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/228189/original/file-20180718-142428-1sqljjw.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">Claudio Divizia via Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Many people tuning into <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0b9v6mj">BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme </a> on July 17 were shocked to hear, in a round-up of the news, presenter <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/profiles/k6FxLL1ZJKytnkmpTjZs67/john-humphrys">John Humphrys</a> read out excerpts from the far right news website <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/">Breitbart</a>. </p>
<p>Humphrys referenced Breitbart’s coverage of the Helsinki summit meeting between the US president, Donald Trump and Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Breitbart described the meeting as a “<a href="https://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2018/07/16/pollak-trumps-summit-with-putin-was-a-success-the-media-cant-admit/">success</a>”. This was in stark contrast to the <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/17/putins-poodle-newspapers-declare-trump-a-traitor-after-helsinki-summit">overwhelmingly negative</a> coverage of Trump from UK news outlets. Although Breitbart is far from mainstream in its views – to say the least – Humphrys (or at least Today producers), presumably felt it was necessary to provide a “balanced” view of the coverage of the summit.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1019110756342693888"}"></div></p>
<p>But that wasn’t the only BBC balance mishap Twitter picked up on yesterday. In the same programme, Humphrys was slated on Twitter for his interview with Clare Basset, chief executive of the <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/our-work/who-we-are">Electoral Commission</a>. The Commission had just published <a href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/i-am-a/journalist/electoral-commission-media-centre/news-releases-donations/vote-leave-fined-and-referred-to-the-police-for-breaking-electoral-law">the result of its investigation</a> into the Brexit campaign group Vote Leave. It fined the group £61,000 and reported them to the police for breaking electoral law. </p>
<p>Humphrys was said to be too critical of the Electoral Commission in the interview, describing the findings of their investigation a “technicality”. People were outraged that the BBC attempting to provide balance in its interviews led to the unnecessary questioning of the Electoral Commission’s independent ruling. Some commentators even felt Humphrys’ attitude towards Basset in the interview lessened the impact of a story which has consequences for the legitimacy of the Brexit referendum.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1019106061821927424"}"></div></p>
<h2>BBC and Brexit</h2>
<p>The BBC’s desire for “neutrality”, “balance” or “impartiality” has been blamed for what many people consider inadequate coverage of Brexit by the public broadcaster. The Guardian journalist Nick Cohen recently accused the BBC of “<a href="http://www.nybooks.com/daily/2018/07/12/how-the-bbc-lost-the-plot-on-brexit/">journalistic cowardice</a>” around reporting of the negative effects of Britain leaving the EU. The BBC’s news editor, James Stephenson, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/statements/james-stephenson-nyr-daily">responded that</a> the BBC “is not an organisation frightened of journalism, but committed to it”. </p>
<p>In recent years, the BBC has increasingly <a href="https://theconversation.com/dont-be-fooled-by-fleet-streets-blue-peter-bashing-the-press-has-an-anti-bbc-agenda-80910">taken to Twitter </a> to point out flaws in criticisms of its programming and news output. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"882605394195091456"}"></div></p>
<p>But on its Brexit coverage – as with many general elections – the BBC has faced a barrage criticism from both sides and it can’t respond to everything. Last year, a cross-party group of 72 MPs wrote to the <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-39335904">director-general Lord Hall</a> to accuse the BBC of being skewed against Leave voters in its Brexit coverage. </p>
<h2>Royal Charter</h2>
<p>In its zeal to be balanced in its reporting on controversial issues, the BBC often seems to alienate both sides. It’s a difficult situation for the public broadcaster. The BBC’s <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/impartiality">editorial guidelines</a> (part of the Royal Charter which governs the corporation) specify that the broadcaster should ensure that “controversial subjects” are handled “with due accuracy and impartiality”. </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Due impartiality is often more than a simple matter of ‘balance’ between opposing viewpoints. Equally, it does not require absolute neutrality on every issue or detachment from fundamental democratic principles. </p>
</blockquote>
<p>So, in fact, the BBC doesn’t have to provide “balance” in every case or where it would be contrary to “democratic principles”. So why did Humphrys balance negative Trump coverage with Breitbart, and berate the Electoral Commission over its ruling? </p>
<h2>Broad perspective?</h2>
<p>There are other parts of the BBC’s editorial guidelines and Royal Charter that are open to interpretation and which could fuel the need for false balance. The guidelines state that the BBC “must be inclusive”, consider a “broad perspective” and make sure “the existence of a range of views is appropriately reflected”. This is problematic, particularly in the digital age where the “range of views” available on an issue is changing all the time and becoming evermore extreme and unfiltered. Should Breitbart be considered to have the same weight as, say, The Guardian?</p>
<p>The need to include a “broad perspective” can mean challenging the views of scientists and experts on important issues like climate change, just for the sake of balance. 99.9% of scientists agree that global warming is happening. But the BBC has broadcast two interviews with the former chancellor of the exchequer, Nigel (now Lord) Lawson, who claims that world temperatures have declined. The BBC initially <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-40889563">defended the decision </a> as respecting their duty to inform listeners of all sides of the debate. Later, the Corporation was <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-43699607">rebuked by Ofcom</a> for not challenging Lawson’s claims robustly enough.</p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"926054893374361601"}"></div></p>
<p>Unlike commercial broadcasters, the BBC is mainly funded by a <a href="http://www.tvlicensing.co.uk/">licence fee</a>. This means the BBC is paid the same amount by everyone who watches TV in the UK, creating a direct link between the BBC and the viewing public. This link with everyone who pays the licence fee means the BBC is held to higher standards in what it broadcasts. People are more likely to complain if their views aren’t represented on the BBC because they’re paying for it.</p>
<p>The BBC’s unique funding mechanism, where everyone pays for it, means that yesterday’s complaints about the Today Programme certainly won’t be the last. While the Corporation has a funding system which requires it to please “everyone”, it is likely that a range of views will still be included on BBC programmes for balance, even when common sense dictates balance isn’t necessary. Climate change deniers pay their licence fee, too, and the BBC needs their money as much as everyone else’s.</p>
<p>For now, the BBC can fend off criticism of false balance. The Corporation can point to the fact that it’s still the <a href="https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0016/103570/news-consumption-uk-2016.pdf">most used</a> and most trusted news source in the UK, against a backdrop of partisan newspapers. But if criticisms of the BBC’s coverage of the main issues facing the UK keep getting louder, trust levels could plummet by the time the BBC’s Royal Charter is up for renewal in 2027.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/100118/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Catrin Owen receives funding from a Future Academic Bursary at the University of Liverpool. She is a member of the Labour Party and also works part time in the constituency office of a backbench Labour Party Member of Parliament alongside her PhD studies.</span></em></p>
The public broadcaster tries to cater to all views, but sometimes that’s a dangerous strategy.
Catrin Owen, PhD candidate in Communication and Media, University of Liverpool
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/97568
2018-06-01T07:30:59Z
2018-06-01T07:30:59Z
Fake news week: three stories that reveal the extreme pressure journalism is now under
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/221331/original/file-20180601-142075-d0jj8g.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">Alisdare Hickson</span>, <a class="license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/">CC BY-SA</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>Three news stories in as many days have betrayed how little understood – or apparently respected – are some of the core principles which underline reputable journalism. For those who believe that trustworthy news and information – and strong institutions behind them – matter in a democracy it is a worrying sign. For the growing numbers of media cynics, it is further evidence of media elitism or corruption. </p>
<p>First, the story from <a href="https://www.opendemocracy.net/uk/james-cusick/george-osborne-s-london-evening-standard-promises-positive-news-coverage-to-uber-goo">James Cusick of openDemocracy</a> that has alleged the London Evening Standard has been selling favourable news coverage to companies including Uber, and Google for £3m. The allegation is that the sales offer goes beyond “native advertising” (which is essentially paid for features that are clearly labelled as sponsored) to – more seriously if true – providing news coverage of those companies that is deliberately skewed to be positive. </p>
<p>If true, it would mean the paper, edited by the former chancellor of the exchequer, George Osborne, had sold its editorial independence to corporate partners. How would any reader know if an article was independent or, effectively, paid-for public relations? </p>
<p>The newspaper has strenuously denied the allegation and said that any deal the company has signed has been for legitimate sponsored features that will be clearly marked. Newspapers are going through a hard time and have to be creative to find new sources of income. But a fundamental principle of editorial independence is a wall between the editorial and commercial operations. If that is breached, editorial credibility collapses too.</p>
<p>The alternative explanation of course, is that openDemocracy is wrong – and this story is “fake news”. As I write, it’s impossible to tell – which means I won’t be reading the latest copy of London’s evening paper.</p>
<h2>Back from the dead</h2>
<p>And while we mention “fake news”, there’s the extraordinary tale of the Russian journalist who was reported to have been murdered on May 29 only to turn up alive at a press conference in Kiev the following day. Apparently <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/may/31/arkady-babchenko-fake-murder-questions-need-answering">Arkady Babchenko faked his death</a> with the help of the Ukrainian secret police. The idea – allegedly – was to trap a gang who were actually trying to kill him. But no evidence of this has been provided.</p>
<p>As a tactic, it hands a propaganda win to the Russians who can say “don’t trust the Ukrainians or Babchenko”. It is a cynical exploitation of the <a href="https://newssafety.org/casualties/2018/">hundreds of journalists who are actually killed</a> each year pursuing crime or corruption – next time a journalist is murdered, those responsible can shrug and say “fake news – remember Babchencko?”</p>
<p>In future, the public can justifiably distrust any announcement from the Ukrainian government – or from Arkady Babchenko – and trust in others will be further corroded. For many people it also reinforces a sense that some governments and journalists work hand in glove – even while others try to undermine or actually kill reporters. Further evidence, whichever way you take it, of the politicisation of the media.</p>
<h2>Amateur hour</h2>
<p>Which brings us to example three: Tommy Robinson. The former leader of the English Defence League was <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-44287640">jailed at Leeds Crown Court</a> on May 29 for a second offence of contempt of court. He had broadcast on his Facebook page live from outside a rape trial, confronting the Muslim defendants. His supporters say he was a “journalist” exercising his right to free speech. The court said he was endangering the trial and – after a similar incident in 2017 for which he had received a suspended sentence – had ignored the judge’s warnings, so was jailed for 13 months.</p>
<p>The social media debate demonstrated how little the <a href="https://twitter.com/BarristerSecret/status/1001451479817949184">principle of contempt of court is understood</a> by sections of the public. It also underlined how casually some lay claim to the title of “journalist” and how swiftly some lay claim to their right to free speech – all the while ignoring the legal and social responsiblities that go with it, which professional journalists are trained to understand. </p>
<p><div data-react-class="Tweet" data-react-props="{"tweetId":"1001534520095633408"}"></div></p>
<p>Of course, the more extreme of his supporters saw a conspiracy between mainstream media and the legal and government “elite” to silence his voice. In the end, even the loudest of social media protestations with the deepest sense of entitlement meets an implacable wall with the law.</p>
<h2>Downward spiral of trust</h2>
<p>What all three of these very different news stories illustrate is the loosening ties between business, government and sections of society with the principles which underlie independent, reputable journalism. Many will shrug and say the media has brought it on itself through cynical tabloid journalism, phone hacking and more. But this too misunderstands that different news organisations work to very different ends. The Financial Times is in a different business to The Sun – or the BBC to The Daily Mail. </p>
<p>The answer to the corrosion of trust and weakening institutional ties is complex. Greater transparency and accountability by the media is key – so the public can understand why some newsrooms deserve their trust; greater media literacy is important in an ever more complex information age where algorithms decide what we know and political agendas are rife. And politicians, activists and business need to recognise that undermining media standards is not, in the end, going to serve them well.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/97568/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Richard Sambrook 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>
Journalism needs to rebuild public trust, but it won’t be easy.
Richard Sambrook, Professor of Journalism, Cardiff University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/70384
2017-01-06T01:16:50Z
2017-01-06T01:16:50Z
Does nonpartisan journalism have a future?
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/151862/original/image-20170105-18653-x6l2gq.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">
</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.shutterstock.com/download/confirm/2890543?src=viVXCyz3fYFt_50REWypbg-2-68&id=2890543&size=huge_jpg">'Shredded papers' via www.shutterstock.com</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>The nonpartisan model of journalism is built around the norm of covering politics as though both parties are equally guilty of all offenses. The 2016 campaign stressed that model to the breaking point with one candidate – Donald Trump – who lied at an astonishing level. <a href="http://www.politifact.com/personalities/donald-trump/">PolitiFact rates</a> 51 percent of his statements as “false” or “pants on fire,” with another 18 percent rated as “mostly false.” His presidency will continue to make nonpartisan journalistic norms difficult to follow. </p>
<p>As a political scientist focused on game theory, I approach the media from the perspective of strategic choice. Media outlets make decisions about how to position themselves within a market and how to signal to news consumers what kinds outlets they are in ideological terms. But they also interact strategically with politicians, who use journalists’ ideological leanings and accusations of leanings to undermine the credibility of even the most valid criticisms.</p>
<p>While Republican politicians have decried liberal media bias for decades, none has done so as vehemently as Trump, who polarizes the media in a way that may not leave an escape.</p>
<h2>The development of a nonpartisan press</h2>
<p>In the 20th and 21st centuries, news outlets have made their money through subscriptions, sales and advertisements. However, before these economic models developed, newspapers had a tough time turning a profit. </p>
<p>In the 19th century, many newspapers were produced and distributed by institutions that weren’t in it for the money. Political parties, therefore, were a primary source of news. <a href="https://books.google.com/books?id=YXsoHlcQ67AC&pg=PA5&lpg=PA5&dq=jeffersonian+newspaper+greeley&source=bl&ots=bG1oYnhdNy&sig=ENwouphKOkZUrwJ9a_YZYhGnADM&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwi9gau71qvRAhVE2SYKHRTDAlgQ6AEIJTAC#v=onepage&q=jeffersonian%20newspaper%20greeley&f=false">Horace Greeley’s Jeffersonian</a> – an outlet for the Whig Party – had a decidedly partisan point of view. Others, like <a href="http://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn83021508/">The Bay State Democrat</a>, had names that told you exactly what they were doing. When Henry Raymond founded The New York Times in 1851 as a somewhat more independent outlet despite his Whig and Republican affiliations, it was an anomaly. Nonetheless, partisan newspapers, for economic and political reasons, <a href="http://search.proquest.com/openview/fcf548c9e92c66e8484b4b2101ed52b5/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=1821075">were common throughout the 19th century, particularly during the early 19th century</a>.</p>
<p>The information in partisan newspapers was hardly unbiased. But nobody expected anything else because the concept of a neutral press didn’t really exist. The development of a neutral press on a large scale required both a different economic production and distribution model and the recognition that there was a market for it.</p>
<p>The muckraking era that began in the early 20th century brought such journalism into the forefront. Muckraking, the forebear of investigative journalism, traces back to Upton Sinclair and fellow writers who uncovered corruption and scandal. Its success demonstrated demand for papers that weren’t partisan, and production and distribution models developed that allowed more nonpartisan papers to turn a profit by filling a gap within the market. </p>
<p>The economic principles at work are always the same. <a href="http://artscimedia.case.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/05152026/mediaspace.pdf">There is a balancing act</a> between the costs of entry and the size of the audience that can be reached which determines when new media outlets can form, just as in any other market. The trick is that costs and benefits change over time.</p>
<h2>Neutrality norms in a complex media environment</h2>
<p>Just as market incentives supported the development of a neutral press, market incentives, combined with technology, have allowed institutions like Fox News and MSNBC to provide news coverage from decidedly conservative and liberal perspectives, with internet sources further fragmenting the media environment into narrow ideological niches. </p>
<p>These media outlets, though, muddy the signals: A nonpartisan journalist strives to levy valid criticism, but a partisan journalist will always criticize the opposing party. Thus a weakly informed voter will have a difficult time distinguishing between, say, a valid accusation from a nonpartisan journalist that a Republican is lying and partisan bias from a left-wing journalist who fails to acknowledge that bias.</p>
<p>The current media landscape is a hybrid, combining opinion-based outlets that resemble the party-affiliated newspapers of the 19th century and journalistic outlets that attempt to follow the muckraking model that developed in the 20th century. The way the latter attempt to distinguish themselves from the former is by following norms of neutrality and asserting that both parties are equally guilty of all political sins. This model breaks down when the parties are no longer equally guilty.</p>
<p>Consider the first presidential debate of 2016. Hillary Clinton mentioned Trump’s <a href="https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en">2012 claim that global warming was a Chinese hoax</a>. Trump interrupted to deny having made the claim. Not only had Trump engaged in an outlandish conspiracy theory, but <a href="http://www.vox.com/2016/9/26/13065174/first-presidential-debate-live-transcript-clinton-trump">he also lied during a debate about having done so</a>.</p>
<p>“Both sides do it” is not a valid response to this level of dishonesty because both sides do not always engage in this level of dishonesty. Yet it was relatively normal behavior for Trump, who rose to the top of the Republican Party by <a href="http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-trump-birther-timeline-20160916-snap-htmlstory.html">gradually taking leadership of the “birther” movement</a> and eventually even <a href="http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2016/sep/16/donald-trump/fact-checking-donald-trumps-claim-hillary-clinton-/">tried to switch the blame for that to Clinton</a>.</p>
<p>The strategic problem in this type of situation is more complex than it appears, and it is what I call “<a href="http://artscimedia.case.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/14182045/journalistsdilemma.pdf">the journalist’s dilemma</a>.” The nonpartisan press can let the lie go unremarked. But to do so is to enable Trump’s lies. On the other hand, if they point out how much he lies, Trump can respond with accusations of liberal media bias. Trump, in fact, goes further than past Republicans, <a href="http://fortune.com/2016/11/03/donald-trump-katy-tur/">even directing crowd hostility toward specific journalists at rallies</a>.</p>
<p>The media landscape, though, is populated by outlets with liberal leanings, like MSNBC, so uninformed news consumers who lack the time to do thorough investigations of every Trump and Clinton claim must decide: If a media outlet says that Trump lies more than Clinton, does that mean he is more dishonest or that the media outlet is a liberal one? The rational inference, given the media landscape, is actually the latter, making it self-defeating for the nonpartisan press to attempt to call out Trump’s lies. This might explain why <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-rated-honest-contest-stays-dead-heat-poll/story?id=43225421">a plurality of voters thought that Trump was more honest than Clinton</a>, despite a record of more dishonesty from Trump at fact-checking sites like <a href="http://www.politifact.com">PolitiFact</a>.</p>
<h2>Nonpartisan journalism in a Trump presidency?</h2>
<p>Is there a way for the neutral press to point out when Trump lies and not have that information get discounted as partisan bias? </p>
<p>The basic problem is that the norms that have guided the nonpartisan press are built around the assumption that the parties are mirror images of each other. They may disagree on policy, but they abide by the same rules. The nonpartisan press as we know it, then, cannot function when one party systematically stops abiding those norms. </p>
<p>The 2016 campaign was an example of what happens when the parties are out of balance. Trump simply lied far more than Clinton, but the nonpartisan press was unable to convey that information to the public because even trying to point that out violates the “both sides do it” journalistic norm, thereby signaling bias to a weakly informed but rational audience, which invalidates the criticism.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, then, the nonpartisan press is essentially stuck, at least until Donald Trump is out of office. While there is no longer a “he said, she said” campaign, the fact that Trump is not only the president but the head of the Republican Party makes his statements informal positions of the Republican Party. For the press to attack those statements as lies is to place themselves in opposition to the Republican Party, making them de facto Democratic partisans.</p>
<p>Because Trump is an entertainer rather than a policymaker, it is difficult for the press to even interview him as a normal political figure <a href="http://theunmutual.blogspot.com/2016/03/the-media-donald-trump-and-andy.html">since he does not respond to facts in conventional ways</a>. Each time he lies, any media outlet that aspires to objectivity must decide whether to point it out – which would make it indistinguishable from the Democratic-aligned press – or to allow the lie to go unremarked, thereby remaining complicit in the lie, tacitly aiding the Republican Party. Neither is likely to inform anyone in any meaningful way, which renders the model of the neutral press nearly inoperable.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/70384/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Justin Buchler 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>
In a complex media environment, it’s become incredibly difficult for the neutral press to point out Donald Trump’s lies without having that information discounted as partisan bias.
Justin Buchler, Associate Professor of Political Science, Case Western Reserve University
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.
tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/56762
2016-03-23T17:19:04Z
2016-03-23T17:19:04Z
Terror attacks put journalists’ ethics on the frontline
<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116235/original/image-20160323-28209-bepiqj.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">h</span> </figcaption></figure><p>Everyone along the street seemed to be watching the same thing. The evenings were still light and curtains were not yet drawn, so people’s TV sets were visible through their ground-floor windows. All the screens showed the burning Twin Towers. This mass consumption of the same news – as happened on September 11, 2001 – is rarer now. The ever-multiplying number of media platforms continues to fracture the attention of their audiences.</p>
<p>Back then, I was on my way back to my flat in Brussels to pack for a flight across the Atlantic. Two days later, I was able to fly to Montreal and travel from there to Manhattan to cover the aftermath of the attacks. It was while I was there that <a href="http://edition.cnn.com/2001/US/09/20/gen.bush.transcript/">George W Bush warned</a> the nations of the world: “Either you are with us or you are with the terrorists.”</p>
<p>This remark may not have been aimed at journalists in particular. The best reporting, however, often leaves room for a degree of interpretation – “with us, or against us” does not. One of journalism’s roles in a democracy is to speak the truth to power, not simply accept power’s rules. </p>
<p>I was reminded of this when I heard the experienced foreign correspondent <a href="http://www.ksmfund.org/2015-awards/2015-guest-honour">Peter Greste reflect</a> on the 400 days he had spent in jail in Egypt after being arrested there on trumped-up charges. Speaking last October, as he presented the Kurt Schork awards in International Journalism at Reuters, he said: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>You know generally when you push the boundary. You know generally when you work when you’ve done something that might upset somebody – someone in government, some administration some way so I was completely taken aback because we hadn’t done anything that was pushing any boundaries.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Greste linked his fate to the way that the world had changed for journalists since September 11. Increasingly, they were not seen as neutral observers – and, as a consequence, were not treated as such.</p>
<h2>Mobilising opinion</h2>
<p>Journalists have greater responsibilities in time of war or national crisis than at any other. Their role is vitally important to voters’ understanding of what their leaders propose to do in their name. The world since September 11 2001 seems to have seen a growing effort in time and money from governments keener than ever to get their side of the story across. The controls placed on reporting in Iraq – for example, “embedding” journalists with troops – during the 2003 invasion and beyond were a reflection of this. The idea that “<a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/20024822">TV lost the Vietnam war</a>” – wrongheaded though it may be – retains an enduring power. </p>
<p>Russia’s <a href="https://theconversation.com/more-truths-than-combatants-as-ukraine-and-russia-gripped-by-a-new-kind-of-media-war-24000">massive deployment of media resources</a> to mobilise supportive opinion of its policies in Ukraine and Syria is just one example. In that case, many Russian journalists have appeared willing to support their country’s foreign policy. Given the overwhelmingly patriotic tone of contemporary Russian coverage of international affairs, that may be the only option for anyone wanting airtime. </p>
<figure class="align-left zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=237&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=790&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=993&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=993&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/116238/original/image-20160323-28196-1303xr9.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=993&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">How the Evening Standard reported the threat from Iraq in 2003.</span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yet what of other cases? How well are audiences served by a one-sided view of events? The answer is not at all well, as <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html">The New York Times acknowledged</a> when admitting that coverage of the run-up to the Iraq war “was not as rigorous as it should have been”. The New York Times was not the only guilty party. At least they decided to admit their failings. </p>
<p>Journalism has risen to unprecedented challenges with varying success. Some of The New York Times’s reporting of the occupation of Iraq and the insurgency which followed was truly outstanding. Yet western journalists covering the “War on Terror” in its various forms have found themselves tested. </p>
<h2>Centre of conflict</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://theconversation.com/uk/topics/brussels-attacks">attacks on Brussels</a> on March 22 were a reminder of why this is. Journalists find themselves at the centre of events as never before. The bombers struck at soft targets to inspire fear. That fear spread as the coverage continued. Without the coverage – or at least if there had been less of it – would the attackers’ aim have been frustrated? Perhaps so. But even if the authorities had requested that, it would have been wrong to agree.</p>
<p>As Greste noted, journalists find themselves at the centre of conflict as never before. Not just war, but political battles, and “anti-terrorist operations”. They are targets. Islamic State beheads them. Others seek to co-opt them. </p>
<p>Ethical dilemmas emerge. In July 2005, I was among the BBC editors who agreed to a reporting blackout as police closed in on the suspects in a series of failed suicide bombings. The idea was that live TV coverage might have tipped off the wanted men. Was it right to do the authorities’ bidding? </p>
<p>There are more questions. How seriously should editors take warnings from anonymous “security sources” about threats? Is this important public safety information, or spin aimed at securing extra funding? </p>
<p>What about stories affecting journalists themselves? As a correspondent based in Brussels, I passed through Zaventem airport countless times. How to keep out of reports the thought “that could have been me”? </p>
<p>The rise of Islamic state, just as much as Tuesday’s attacks, show the value of good journalism. The former by its initial absence from the news – hence the surprise which accompanied the group’s territorial gains in Iraq and Syria – the latter by telling people about the world they live in. Few did, or could, report the rise of Islamic State. Its seizure of territory, and oil fields, came as a shock. </p>
<p>Ideally, journalists would do their jobs without having to take sides – although some would still choose to do so, as we saw by the <a href="https://theconversation.com/brussels-attacks-callous-brexit-tweeters-will-lose-the-battle-for-hearts-and-minds-56710">shabby attempts by controversialist Brexiteer columnists</a> to make a political point out of the Brussels bombs. </p>
<p>In a world where, despite its complexity, journalists are under pressure to be with us or against us, their craft cannot function properly – and that is a loss for all of us.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/56762/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>James Rodgers 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 reporting of terrorist atrocities is polarising opinion in a way that is dangerous for the craft of journalism.
James Rodgers, Senior Lecturer in Journalism, City, University of London
Licensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.