CIME Blog

Persian Journalists Fight Threats to Freedom

2012-02-11T12:58:00.008Z

BBC Persia was barely born when the June 2009 election results in Iran led to debilitating censorship. Ever since the team have faced augmented difficulties, forced to make a choice; Iranian free speech or their own freedom.

The 2009 results that gave Ahmadinejad his second term of presidency were disputed by the three other candidates, two of whom, Karroubi and Mousavi, have not been silenced. They continue to lead their supporters in sustained protest as the ‘Green Movement’. Though an alleged 70 members of the movement have been killed, the hundreds of thousands remaining are far from despair.

Communication between the Movement and the international community is indispensible. The Iranian government’s provocative decisions in foreign policy threaten stability, inviting sanctions and military action. The voices of the unrepresented are striving to be heard. The BBC listens, manoeuvring around strict censorship through user-generated content, the production of which remains prolific despite the threats to personal safety that contribution brings. The men and women who protect the public right to show the ‘green’ image of Iran are far from exempt to these threats. Just last week, a BBC Persian staff member suffered the arrest of his sister, who was kept in solitary confinement without charge before being released on bail. Other staff members have endured public accusations of sexual assault, drug trafficking and fraud.

It is hard to imagine compiling unbiased, ethical reports under conditions with such personal stakes. Yet, the team seem equal to the task. Moutalebi, an Iranian blogger whose opinions earned him 23 days solitary confinement, rightly sympathised when he said "They don't know when they can see their families, and then you have to come to work at 7 a.m. and be as objective as possible." The staff of BBC Persia are an inspiring example of journalist’s prioritising public interest over their own.

Sources:

BBC 03 Feb 2012

BBC 23 Jun 2009

Facial Recognition Software Encroaching on Freedom

2012-02-10T23:05:00.006Z

With new technologies in facial recognition, some have voiced concern over this newfound power falling into the wrong hands, namely the media and investigative journalists. Law enforcement officials are taking great strides in the development and use of facial recognition software. Since as early as 2009, biometric technology has spurred interest in criminologists such as the Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office of Technical Services Division, who after successfully capturing several images of a bank robber, were able to arrest him shortly thereafter using biometric information. Perhaps incited by their success, the Pinellas County Department took it a step further by decreeing all state registered identification cards a form of searching for wanted criminals —they are the first in the nation to do so.

But they are not the last. Several more officials are switching over to this method as it has yielded promising results. India, Mexico, the United Kingdom and the United States are among many countries currently using biometric data for identification purposes. The latter two are especially big proponents of using biometric technology in schools. While it is argued that this technology exists to benefit us and provide protection, many groups and organizations have voiced concerns. The Electronic Privacy Information Center based in Washington, in particular, has spoken out about the potential for misuse:

“Facial recognition system errors would lead to innocent people being falsely matched to watch lists or databases, while suspects would pass through the system unrecognized”

they stated on January 31, 2012.

Other individuals are largely concerned about the violation of privacy. With law enforcement officials readily using the technology and fighting for its increased use, the next logical step would be for it to fall into the hands of the media. If the media were to gain this kind of power, one would have to question the ethics behind it. It could be argued that the public could greatly benefit from the media's collaboration as criminals would have seemingly nowhere to hide, however, the balance of power would seem faulty.

Should the media and news outlets be allowed to use facial recognition software? If so, to what end? Is it ethical for the media to bypass our right to remain anonymous? Most importantly, is this issue really much more deeply rooted in a violation of basic human freedom? Let us know what you think in the comments.

Source: CaliforniaWatch

Does Princess Caroline of Monaco Have A Privacy Claim?

2012-02-09T19:21:00.002Z

According to the European Court, the answer is no.

Rejecting the invasion-of-privacy complaint by Princess Caroline of Monaco, the courts upheld the right of the media to be able to report on celebrities.

This brings about the tension that is of the media's right to expression and the individual's right to privacy. While the media shouldn't go invading in the personal affairs of individuals, celebrities hold a different standard. They choose to be in the spotlight so they must be able to handle the dim lighting.

You can't help to feel sympathetic for these public figures as paparazzi constantly bombard their personal space. Even for Princess Caroline's daughter, Charlotte Casiraghi, has had her share of media hounding. Although her mother's suit was rejected, Charlotte is waging her own privacy battle on the media for intruding into her private life and publishing doctored photographs. According to the Telegraph, the 25-year-old is being relentlessly pursued by individuals and photographers night and day.

Typical examples such as these raise the question of when should the line be drawn? Does this go against journalistic ethics?

We do wonder how this case will have an impact on the Leveson inquiry where multiple celebrities' phones were being tapped. Ethical press issues are definitely at the forefront. How do you think this case should be decided and are the ethical issues in the Leveson inquiry different from Princess Caroline's privacy complaint?

Source: The Telegraph

Nudity and death on front page

2012-02-08T11:39:00.004Z

We often see photos of dead, injured or naked people in the front page of newspapers which is not ethical. This is mostly done for commercial reasons. Sometimes newspapers publish inappropriate or disrespectful photos in order to attract attention and raise their sales even though this is against media ethics.

In October 2011, one of the mainstream newspapers in Turkey, Haberturk has published a photo of a dead woman who was stabbed in the back without the image being censored. This newspaper which has got a huge reaction has been accused of publishing death pornography and being disrespectful to the victim and her relatives. After the death of Libyan leader Gaddafi in October 2011, the front page of many countries’ mainstream newspapers were full of bloody photos of the dead dictator. Publishing dead photos of Gaddafi

These are examples of traditional print journalism. The thought-provoking thing is the social media dimension of the situation. Social media users are able to share whatever image they want and there are no limits as there are no codes of ethics for the use of social media. It is possible to see a disturbing and disrespectful image, if not in a newspaper, in a social media page. Does this situation legitimize the use of these images by newspapers? When for example an image has already been seen by everyone via social media, should newspapers feel like publishing it is not unethical as it is already in the public sphere? Is social media relaxing the journalistic ethic codes? Or do newspapers still have to be respectful and careful when choosing their images to publish?

Source: Haberturk, MedyaEtik

Are anonymous comment sections necessary?

2012-02-06T09:35:00.001Z

Comments on news articles should be a place for people to debate intelligently about the meaning behind a story, to share their own unique experiences of said story and to most importantly, learn and engage in an open sea of dialogue. What actually happens is invariably a sea of often extreme, often irrelevant, often insulting bilge.

Many media websites have comments sections (this blog included), however, is this actually adding anything at the moment? When human beings have the chance to say things anonymously, they usually go for the extreme. There are no consequences and so people push the boundaries of what is acceptable (or quite clearly and completely unacceptable) as they know there will be no repercussions. This leads people to believe that extremist views are acceptable as other people agree with them and this only leads to bigotry.

Randomly selecting a newspaper article on the Daily Mail about how the Indian Foreign Secretary described the aid given by Britain to India as peanuts, I know that before reading the top rated comments, they will be full of bigots being applauded anonymously by other bigots. Let’s have a look.

‘OMG outrageous ... Give it to our own country then , they don’t deserve the peanuts we all donate .... god i hate this world sometimes’ 2144 Likes.

Does this comment add anything to the world apart from making 2144 people feel better about their uninformed views so they do not look elsewhere for more enlightening information? Should comment sections on media websites be deactivated or do you think that they add something to stories? Please comment below if you believe this to be true.

Source: Daily Mail

Journalism Continues To Be Deadly Profession

2012-02-04T21:15:00.004Z

Somalia is widely considered to currently be one of the most dangerous places in the world to live. With over one million landmines, warring tribes and terrorist groups, and a government with little to no control, it is bordering on total anarchy. It comes as horrifically tragic news that the recent murder of Senior Journalist Hassan Osman Abdi cements it as the “most dangerous place in Africa for media.” News reports confirm that on January 28, 2012, Abdi was the victim of a shooting involving several unknown gunmen and five shots fired, upon arrival to his home in Mogadishu.

As the director of Shabelle Media Network, Abdi was a prominent journalist and one of the leading figures in Somali news and media spheres. The Shabelle Network, based in the capital –Mogadishu, frequently reported on government corruption and extortion, accumulating many dangerous enemies in the process.

Every omitted report and stifled story is a temporary victory for criminal organizations. Terrorist groups like the al-Shabaab (the militant youth Islamist group associated with the attack on Abdi) thrive off of public fear and ignorance, and greatly benefit from media censorship. The ethical dilemma surrounding journalists, however, particularly those in politically tumultuous areas such as Mogadishu, is no easy one. Should journalists continue to investigate, report, and expose the raw truth, even while putting their own lives and their families' lives at risk? If journalists are to instead turn a blind eye to crime and scandal, where will the line be drawn? Let us know what you think in the comments.

Source: AllAfrica

Journalism in the South by Southwest

2012-02-04T21:07:00.015Z

In order to keep up with journalism ethics, one must keep up with the changing landscape of the field. That's why South by Southwest's interactive festival may be the perfect place for you to be this spring.

Recently, South by Southwest (SXSW) announced their schedule for the 2012 festival and included in the 5,000+ events are 5 panels focused on journalism.

For those of you unfamiliar with the festival, SXSW is hosted in Austin, Texas and features conferences in film, music, and interactive. SXSW Music is one of the largest music festivals in the United States and SXSW Interactive has attracted a strong following among journalists as well as web creators and entrepreneurs with its focus on emerging technology.

Some of the events have yet to be announced but will be updated closer to the conference's opening date of March 9, 2012.

Some of the journalism panels include Big Ol' Baby Boomers = Public Media FAIL and Open Web, Open News: Reporters & Developers Remix.

The initial panel discusses the tension that arises between the digital natives working towards innovation as the baby boomers are working to stay buoyant during these uncertain times. Questions the panel considers include: Are the decisions made by the older generation too safe and what themes of conflict are emerging between the two generations across organizations?

The latter panel discusses the innovations that occurs as news organizations are moving their print and broadcast past into a new era of all-web reporting. The conversation will address: How do we bring the best practices of both disciplines to bear on the other? How do we broaden the scope, spread the code, and create real impact?

One panel that may seem of interests, especially to CIME's J-Ethinomics participants is the panel It's Not News, It's Business. The main topic discusses strategies journalists and media entrepreneurs alike must figure out how to make a product that serves the public and meets the bottom line. As this panels features presenters from The Washington Post, Nieman Journalism Lab, IDEO, and Good Magazine, it would be interesting to compare notes on J-Ethinomics findings with those presented from this panel.

Other notable journalism panels include How Comics Journalism Is Saving Your Media and Storytelling Beyond Words: New Forms of Journalism.

As the field of journalism is taking a drastic shift in the 21st century, it is important to keep up to date with these changes as ethics is shifted as well.

Will you be attending the festival or have you attended in the past? Please comment below with your thoughts.

For a full list of SXSW's schedule visit: http://schedule.sxsw.com/2012

Media Portrayal of Women in Politics

2012-01-30T07:41:00.002Z

The events of last week have again drawn people’s attention to the way in which the media portrays powerful women. On January 26, this year’s Australia Day celebrations were met with anger protests by Aboriginal rights groups directed towards the leader of the opposition, Tony Abbott for comments he had made about their ‘Invasion Day’ protests. This event probably would have gone unnoticed across the world had it not been for the photos of Australia’s Prime Minister, Julia Gillard, being protected by the security guard and losing one of her shoes in the ensuing melee.

These pictures showed Gillard looking fragile with her security guard shielding her from danger. This footage has drawn more coverage across the world than any recent stories about Australia. In some places, the only coverage Ms Gillard will receive and by extension, the only way in which she will be known in some country is as the woman cowering from a threat, being protected by a man. The widespread coverage shows that many aspects of the media are not comfortable with the idea of powerful women.

Many female politicians (as the below article shows) are portrayed in this way, a way in which male politicians are not. When they show any sort of emotion, the media leaps on to it in order to show, arguably, that the women adhere to traditional stereotypes of being highly emotional and prone to showing vulnerability. This is an example of the male orientated media environment that is currently prevalent.

There are no pictures of Mr Abbott being escorted away from the protest that was essentially directed at him. Why is this? Is it because that would not provide such a perfect image of vulnerability as the little lady cowering in the arms of the big burly man? Or were there simply no pictures of Mr Abbott doing the same?

Source: The Guardian

The state of journalism ethics in Hungary

2012-01-28T11:07:00.004Z

The current climate in Hungary is spicy and the independence and pluralism of the media are claimed to be threatened. Under pressure journalists might forget the ethical considerations and many claims that fabrication, copy-pasting and falsifying information are common practises today in Hungary.

Some journalists even went on hunger strike protesting against the political pressure after „the image of the former chief justice was blurred in a December TV news show because previously he had expressed criticism toward the government”.

The case of Klubrádió, considered to be the only opposition radio in the country, has also raised international concerns. The radio was a talk and news channel but its frequency was given to another station offering a higher price and more music. The case is highly disputed claiming that the government wanted to take control of the media while they deny this.

Several international organisations expressed their concern against the questionable state of the Hungarian media and other regulations of the government and negotiations are in the process. The disputed Media Act accepted in December 2010 had sections, among others, on limitation of the protection of sources, restrictions of content considered „insulting” and used expressions vaguely interpretable. Some of these were already cancelled thanks to the Constitutional Court but there are still parts that would need further revision.

In the meanwhile, journalists, editors and news agencies need to practise ethics themselves. We are welcoming the initiative of the Editors’ Forum in Hungary for a common code of ethics for the Hungarian media.

As discussed one year ago in January 2011 at the CIME Forum in Hungary, media self-regulation should be an agreement among journalists and the state should stay away from discussion of free individuals. CIME believes that journalists together have the power to formulate and enforce a tacit code of ethics as a status quo of their profession.

Source: Committee to Protect Journalists

Ohio News Station Covers High Profile Trial with Puppets

2012-01-25T20:08:00.003Z

Anderson Cooper, on Monday night, pokes fun at the satirical “Sesame Street” -like take of the real life courtroom drama surrounding Jimmy Dimora.

Making the “Ridiculist” on Anderson Cooper 360° was the Akron federal trial of ex-Cuyahoga County Commissioner Jimmy Dimora, who pleaded not guilty to bribery and racketeering. It was the portrayal of the case with puppets, however, that caused many news gatherers to question the ethics or, at least, the journalistic integrity of the trial coverage.

“I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again,” proclaims Anderson Cooper, “Puppets and journalism do not mix. Never! Not under any circumstances, whatsoever.”

Since the judge has barred cameras from the courtroom, it seems that many news media has shifted to capturing testimonies and other trial details through unconventional ways. At least that’s the case of news station WOIO and its sister station, WUAB.

The charges against Dimora are found in a 36-count, 148-page federal indictment, alleging that he used his county commissioner's office as the base to run a criminal enterprise. WOIO news director, Dan Salamone, said in an interview with the Associated Press that the puppets are “satirical” and meant to lampoon the sometimes-steamy testimony which includes details of a topless hot tub excursion in Las Vegas and taped phone calls with off-color and often unprintable comments.

Salamone goes on to say that the puppetry is “appropriately placed at the end of the newscast.”

This story sheds light on the ethics of how much entertainment value should be allowed in newscast. Does using puppets to portray serious issues go too far in journalism? What entertainment value, if any, do you use in your reporting? Pitch in a hand and comment below, as we would love to hear your thoughts on the subject.

Fabricating exclusive interviews

2012-01-22T23:38:00.002Z

When the singer Beyonce gave birth to her much anticipated baby with rapper husband Jay Z, it became headline news all around the world. With much hype the baby’s birth was announced and with this much fanfare the exclusive right to interview the happy couple seemed to be on. However when the UK Star magazine announced that the secretive couple gave their exclusive first interview with their magazine, it seemed quite impressive. The article divulges on the birth of their first baby, the celebrity dad’s responsibilities, their joy and quotes credited to the pop star appear to address the issue of heavy security at the hospital where she gave birth to Blue Ivy Carter on 14 January.

It seemed like any other exclusive interview with a demanded celebrity, that’s until it turned out to be a complete fake interview.

Beyonce spokesperson called the interview “completely made up”, despite this the Star Magazine's editor has denied the claim.

"It is not made up or fictitious at all," Anna Pointer said.

"We bought the interview from a reporter in the US, who conducted the interview with Beyonce before the birth.

"The reporter then obtained the 'top-up' info after the birth, which we believe to have been signed off by a girl on her LSM team," she told US TV show Access Hollywood.

The claim arises in the wake of when several celebrity magazine editors appeared before the Leveson inquiry into press standards.

Several questions in the inquiry dealt with the issue of misleading headlines on front covers.

This issue has certainly highlighted that when such purposely misleading articles come from such high circulating magazines, this becomes even more detrimental to the public’s view of the ethical standards of the media, which is already on shaky grounds after the Murdock media scandal.

Source: BBC

„The first casualty of war is always the truth”

2012-01-16T13:50:00.003Z

Risking their lives to show the truth to the world is no easy task. War journalists constantly work in danger and not without point. News about wars are the most read and viewed around the world and the most popular subject of public interest. War journalists do really work for the public interest.

The catch phrase of the ’5 Days of War’ movie trailer says „The first casualty of war is always the truth”. This film present the Russian-Georgian war from 2008 from the point of view of American war correspondents. Contradicting our previous statement that war is the most read type of news, in the movie they struggle to get their footage about the starting war into the news as the Olympic games are on. However, it is a decision for the editor-in-chief to make what is more important to broadcast: suffering of other people or entertaining games. What serves more/better the public interest?

From the journalists’ side on the ground, we could argue whether their involvement with the happenings and interference to save locals were strictly along the lines of objective reporting practices. In case of disasters and conflicts, it is always disputed if journalists should or should not interfere. As a human yes; as an objective reporter probably no. In case of involvement, omitting those parts/people from the footage could save the objectivity of the report.

Nevertheless, the movie is worth to watch and it gives a fair idea to the public how those war reports they see comfortably from their canape at home are made and might think differently of journalists.

Profit or quality?

2012-01-15T17:59:00.001Z

The ethical standards of journalism have fallen, the best proof was the failure of the British news giant in 2011. News companies can easily lose their readers due to lack of trust among other reasons and they can hardly afford paying enough for well-sourced, fact-checked stories or to conduct indepth investigations. Hence, badly paid reporters are not striving to present excellent work ethics. It seems to be an endless circle.

However, a new trend recently has appeared that might be the actual future of journalism, and a good quality one. Non-profit news agencies are established in developed countries, such as the USA and UK. Foundations and other donors are willing to support these news agencies to provide accurate and reliable reporting services.

As a non-profit news agency, there are no dividends for shareholders and all the income goes to support investigation, salaries of ethically working journalists and other operational costs. Journos working here might not suffer from poor wages and therefore are less tempted to get into corruption or neglect fact checking, source protection etc. Sounds like a paradise, isn’t it?

But how long would it take to the current profit oriented system to transfer into a reliable media pattern where the public is well informed, the journalists follow ethical practices at work and everyone is happy? Comments are welcome!

Source: New Model Journalism

The Tweeting of a Brothel Raid – Who Benefits?

2012-01-15T08:23:00.002Z

Nick Kristof, the multi-award winning New York Times journalist, recently live tweeted a raid on a Cambodian brothel. This has raised a large number of ethical issues regarding the benefits of this type of reporting. It is essential that good media reporting is of benefit to society and this is why the media can be so important. So who benefited from this?

The women in the brothel. It is unlikely that these women benefitted. It is hoped that this raid would have taken place with or without Kristof’s live tweeting of the situation. However, there is an argument to say that the Cambodian officials may have acted more professionally with the eyes of an American reporter watching. It was the observing of the raid rather than the reporting of it on Twitter that may have indirectly benefited the girls but this is only a slight benefit, if any.

Other women in other brothels in Cambodia. It is extremely unlikely to be of benefit to these women. One of the most powerful uses of investigative reporting should be to give those who are in a similar position the knowledge that they are not alone in their suffering and to empower them to escape their damaging situations. Only around 0.5% of Cambodians can be described as regular internet users, according to the CIA World Factbook and it is extremely unlikely that any of these women in brothels are followers of Nick Kristof on Twitter! These people do not benefit from this type of reporting and neither does anyone else within Cambodia as it is, simply, not accessed by them.

The Wider Community. In-depth reporting of the incident that Mr Kristof described, if written intelligently and with a certain degree of perspective, could help to educate the wider community both in Cambodia and in the rest of the world. By raising awareness amongst everyone of these practices in a balanced and sensitive manner, everyone can benefit. However, live tweeting does not do this. The best case scenario is that someone on Twitter will read these tweets and this will spark an interest leading them to read more widely on the subject. Just reading tweets that say things like ‘Girls are rescued, but still very scared. Youngest looks about 13, trafficked from Vietnam’ does not add enough to people’s knowledge of the situation for it to be beneficial.

The Reporter. The increased twitter following and the rewarding pat on the back for doing something that seems to many at first glance as a positive thing will only increase the author’s reputation with no thought for the damaging effect or lack of effect that this reporting may have.

Is this an unfair portrayal of the situation? Who do you think benefits from this type of reporting?

Source: Storify

Leveson Inquiry: More than just phone hacking

2012-01-05T08:32:00.003Z

The Leveson inquiry, born out of the ashes of the phone hacking scandal has put the spotlight on many other aspects of media ethics. One of the most prominent of these has been the poor reporting of violence against women in light of the submission’s put before the enquiry by End Violence Against Women (EVAW), Equality Now, Object and the rape charity Eaves.

One report by the Daily Mail of the rape of two under-aged girls described the incident as an ‘orgy’ and described the girls as ‘lolitas’ before describing in graphic detail what occurred during the incident. The question must be asked: who is this type of newspaper report serving? Does it help to draw public attention towards a troubling incident and lead society to analyse why this event occurred and how similar events can be avoided on the future? Or is it instead designed to provide illicit titillation to Daily Mail readers who like to see themselves as the moral barometer of the UK while consuming these types of story every day?

EVAW also argued that reports such as the one provided in the Daily Telegraph (see the link below) do not treat violence against women in an ethical manner. By focusing the story on the alleged reason for the perpetrator’s actions, it is almost giving a reason as to why the perpetrator acted in the way that he did rather than focusing on the horrific nature of the attack and the consequences of this. This runs dangerously close to the ‘she asked for it’ attitudes that it was hoped had been removed, at least from the mainstream British media.

These submissions have drawn attention to the fact that the media must be extremely careful when reporting any violent crime in order to; one, ensure that those who have suffered as a consequence of this violence are not re-victimised by the subsequent reports; two, that editors do not use these reports to focus on the explicit details that could provide titillation in order sell more papers from a story that should not be treated in a light-hearted manner and finally; to ensure that society’s reaction to this type of story is not in direct contrast to the manner with which such matters should be treated i.e. humorous titillation vs. disgust at the suffering of others. It will be interesting to see what occurs as a result of these issues being brought to public attention.

Link: The Daily Telegraph

India's Media Landscape

2011-12-23T06:43:00.001Z

Before reading this, I had no previous knowledge of the media and reporting situation in India right now. In this article, the Press Council of India chairman Justice Markandey Katju claims that the journalists of India are mostly all uneducated and not intellectual people. While this accusation made many journalists and non-journalist citizens enraged, it was not completely unfounded. India’s media has been reporting skewed stories for decades, and it is only becoming more obvious. Newspapers and daily magazine writers struggle to meet the simple requirements demanded from reporters. Much of the writing has no sources or concrete research.

In addition to having little factual information, many articles only report a fraction of the whole story due to censorship and bias of the organizations. Newspapers as well as TV have been overtaken by advertisements and popular culture since, as we all know, attractive celebrities and dramatic headlines attract more readership. Once the reader can actually locate the news story being covered, the article sources are ambiguous as to who wrote them or sponsored the writers. This article discusses the argument made that objective reporting can only thrive in non-profit environments. I agree with this since any monetary support will clearly skew the opinion of the writer one way or another.

It is a confusing situation and one that only seems to be spiraling downwards. India’s media and reporting community needs to regain control and start doing what media are supposed to do: deliver factual information and current events to those relying on national publications or television reports. One interesting thing about the media landscape in India is that print and television are on the rise, whereas in other countries they are being outdone by online reporting. Mohan proposes that the path to creating an equal world of Journalism in India is to expand the freedom of the press, not limit it. It may be tempting to further regulate journalism because of the rough patch it has had in India, but according to Mohan, the journalists should be treated like the democracy they are. If one source starts reporting factual information, this will create new standards for competition. The second fix, in my opinion, would be to somehow regulate how many advertisements can be in each publication versus how much coverage.

Interesting story to follow, please comment and post other links about India’s current situation regarding the media and journalism!

source: Wall Street Journal blog

Photo Manipulation in the Media

2011-12-08T15:20:00.000Z

Flipping through magazines, it is easy to accept the pictures as reality. After all, they are right there in front of you. Two students at Dartmouth have made it their mission to bring awareness and emphasize how unrealistic the images in the media can be. They are not trying to go after magazine that alter photos for lighting or resolution purposes, but instead for magazines or newspapers that edit characteristics to make the subject seem more appealing. At first, the UK considered requiring all edited photos to have a disclaimer underneath, but many photos are edited for simple touch-ups and that would be misleading to say they were modified. Farid and Kee have developed software that determines how much a picture has been modified based on original images of that same subject.
Besides the fact that this extreme photo editing is unethical, I agree that editing women’s bodies to make them look flawless will skew our perception of beauty. If the magazines are saying that beauty is a perfect (but edited) body, tan skin and painted over skin with no marks, society will use that as a baseline for beauty. This new “baseline” is so unattainable that people become obsessed with reaching a goal that is nonexistent. Not to mention, it distracts us from noticing true, natural beauty.

Source: Guardian

Leveson Inquiry Update

2011-12-05T07:28:00.001Z

Britain’s leading trade union for photo journalists have called to be allowed to be given ‘core participant’ status in order to counter act what they believe to be sustained and unjustified criticism from witnesses in the Leveson Inquiry.
The McCanns, Hugh Grant and Sienna Miller have all spoken about how they have been dogged by the paparazzi who have chased after them and rifled through their bins. Obviously, this form of treatment is unacceptable but The British Photographers’ Association does not believe that this behaviour is carried out by all photographers and would like the opportunity to argue this in court. The behaviour of the individuals that carry out this behaviour should be prosecuted criminally and not treated as the norm amongst photo journalists.

It must also be remembered that many of these people have courted publicity in the past for their own personal benefit providing the pictures that have made them more famous. While this does not, by any means, mean that the way these rogue photo journalists have treated people is acceptable, it does mean that a whole group of individuals who make a good, honest living from taking photos of celebrities (often that the celebrities utilise to enhance their careers) should not be tarred with this same brush.

Also, at the Leveson Inquiry this week, the man who was in charge of investigating potential breaches of privacy by the media has told he was warned by officials that the newspapers were too big to take on. Alex Owens told the inquiry that all newspapers apart from ‘the Dandy and Beano’ (two children’s’ comics) were implicated in the documents he had uncovered during the course of Operation Motorman conducted by the police force.

The question has to be asked; how was the British press ever allowed to get so powerful that the police and Government officials were afraid to challenge them when they had evidence of breaching the law? The Leveson Inquiry is continuing to expose many extremely damaging facts about the way the British Press has conducted itself over recent times and it will be interesting to see if things change as a result of this inquiry.

Source: The Guardian

Social media for survival - substituting the media?

2011-12-04T17:21:00.002Z

Media people are under pressure in the climate in Mexico as they might risk their lives if they report information related to drug kartells. Then how can the public stay informed? Fighting for their survival, Mexicans were creative enough to turn to the social networking tools where information can be shared quickly and broadly.

„Social media has become a necessity in Mexico, with a mission far different from what has emerged in the Arab revolutions, or in China” says The New York Times.

In the recent dangerous atmosphere in Mexico, citizens need information real-time more than ever. To avoid passing by areas of conflict, people started to use social media, especially Twitter as information channel. People tweet if they see something suspicious or dangerous so their network survives.

Does this mean that the press fails to fulfill its original function of providing credible information to the citizens?

Despite the importance of this new trend, there are still abuses to the system, the so called „Twitter terrorism” which refers to spreading false rumours on the network to create fear. How can one be sure the information tweeted in valid?

Source: The New York Times

What Constitutes "News"

2011-11-30T22:56:00.000Z

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, the author of the book Gossip, has noted that articles in professional news sources have become somewhat polluted with articles and stories that have nothing to do with the world news. Before gossip became a source for journalists to get attention, the gossip section of a paper or magazine was seen as unnecessary and didn’t seem to have a place in standard news. The spiral of gossip journalism seems to have all begun when the Licensing Act was revoked in the late 1600s. This abolished censorship laws that had previously kept journalists from reporting on personal details. At this point, it was clear that personal, detailed and controversial news articles grabbed the attention of passerby’s more so than financial reports or town council updates.

It is true that even articles not labeled as “gossip columns” have become all about gossip, prying into personal lives and reporting them to the public. Harcourt points out the American magazines such as US, People, and InTouch and says that the competition is what perpetuates the questionably unethical system. The problem is that it is a never ending cycle, and our everyday standard news is being overridden by hyped-up gossip stories.

Source: Salon.com

Discrimination in sport reporting

2011-11-27T20:51:00.003Z

In the light of the upcoming 2012 Olympics, it is timely to look into the sport reporters’ ethical conduct, if they have any.

Racial prejudice or discrimination based on sex are the most common mistakes reporters can make while reporting on sports events.

Female champions may still be underestimated or commented with sexist regards while athletes from different races get comments about their ethnical background. In the age of equality these can no longer be tolerated. Such ethical pitfalls of sports journalists may result in their dismissals and end of journalism career.

An edifying example was the case of Ron Atkinson, British TV commentator who made a racist comment about a football player. Realising his mistake he immediately resigned after a long and successful media career. No matter how brilliant trackrecord one has, because one little slip can ruin it all.

A more recent testimony was the firing of Andy Gray, another British sport commentator for his sexist comment on a female referee.

In general, sports unite people around the world to compete against each other while millions cheer up for them. It is a wonderful mixture of nationalities, backgrounds and personalities. Undermining the importance of this diversity is definitely not in the job desciption of journalists.

Sources:
Journalism and the challenge of racism in sport
The Guardian - TV pundit Ron Atkinson sacked for racist remark
BBC - Andy Gray sacked by Sky for offensive behaviour

The effect of climate change differs by country, so does reporting about it

2011-11-23T20:26:00.002Z

Covering scientific subjects is not an easy task and you need to be familiar with the topic to be able to write a comprehensive and accurate article. So much can depend on what you write and how you write it, especially with regards to such sensitive topics as climate change.

A recent study from the Oxford University’s Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism revealed the differencies in reporting about climate change among 6 significant countries.

The USA and the UK media tend to be more sceptical while India and Brazil for instance are reluctant towards spectics. This has a long history related also to the fact that the USA has contributed greatly to the current environmental situation and they tend to deny their responsibility.

Journalists always need to adapt to the current atmosphere of society to increase (or at least keep) readership. But how does it effect the public opinion? If one side of they story gets more emphasis, the objectivity and maybe even the truth get lost.

Raising awareness and educating the public are important in order to fight global warming. The blame game does not help reduce the effects of climate change, instead a healthy coverage of scientific facts and forecasts as well as explanations should be in the focus with a reasonable balance of critics.

Sensationalism, exaggerating certain effects or forecasts of climate change might result in the public becoming ignorant to such stories. Journalists themselves have to decide what is best for the longer term and for the broader public.

More on Covering Climate Change Responsibly

Source: Poles Apart: why climate change journalism varies so much between countries

One Rogue Reporter, One Rogue Newspaper or a Systemic Problem?

2011-11-17T14:36:00.001Z

This week at the Leveson inquiry, David Sherborne, the barrister representing people from JK Rowling to Chris Jefferies (the man wrongly suspected of murdering Joanna Yeats) stated that the British tabloid press had engaged in ‘blackmail, intrusion, harassment, hounding and bullying.’ Following on from James Murdoch’s second appearance before a Parliamentary select committee last week, the British tabloid press have never before had their practices so publicly questioned. The News of the World has been closed due to the phone hacking controversy but does anyone really believe that these seemingly systemic and certainly deeply engrained practices were practiced by just one rogue newspaper?

The suggestion the inquiry that amongst the 28 names scrawled within the notes of Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator at the heart of the phone hacking scandal, were not all journalists for the News of the World and had in fact worked for other newspapers was not rebuffed. It appears that many other newspapers in Britain will be watching the proceedings of the inquiry with anxious thoughts about their paper’s own use of these unethical practices and so they should be. Ethical media practices are not necessary just because the law says so, they should be upheld by journalist in order to protect journalism itself. If the public does not trust the media, then the media is unable to have the power with which it can do its best work in a democratic society as it loses all efficacy as a trustworthy source.

The British press has long been respected by others across the world as a paradigm example of what press freedom should look like. In the wake of this enquiry, people may now begin to question whether the freedom went too far and the British press has in fact for years been working outside of the legal and ethical constraints that should, indubitably, be respected. The next few weeks should be extremely interesting for British media ethics and by extension, global media ethics. Watch this space!

Source: The Guardian

Be Careful Before Re-tweeting

2011-11-16T20:16:00.002Z

Jenifer Rubin, an opinion writer for the Washington Post, is being criticized for activity on her person twitter handle. This is a debate that media ethics has never had before, but one that will continue to be relevant through the rise of online social media. In early October, Rubin re-tweeted a tweet by Rachel Abrams about the release of Israeli Soldier Gilad Shalit. Journalists re-tweet opinion articles all the time on their personal handle, so why is this one causing everyone to get so heated? It’s because of the content of the tweet. Abrams had tweeted “Gilad is free and home. Now round up his death-worshiping captors and turn them into food for sharks tinyurl.com/3jfugq2.” The tweet linked to Abrams’ blog post that referred to the Palestinian captors as “death-worshiping, innocent-butchering, child-sacrificing savages who dip their hands in blood and use women”. It is no argument that this blog post could be offensive to some, but Rubin argues that re-tweeting does not mean you agree. Giving something a “like” on Facebook clearly shows that you agree with the content, but re-tweeting can be just to share something controversial.
I think that it is an unspoken agreement that, when a journalist is employed by an influential news source, he/she accepts the fact that whether on or off the job, they are still a representative of the organization. I understand that Rubin is an opinion writer, and that this was unrelated to work. However, I also think that she could have shared the link in a different way than re-tweeting it. Perhaps tweet it with her own commentary, or put it on her Facebook.

Washington Post

Investigative journalism ethics in The Pelican Brief

2011-11-14T18:28:00.004Z

Probably most of you know the story in the movie ’The Pelican Brief’, in a summary a talented law student finds out the conspiracy behind the assassinasion of two Supreme Court Justices and the traces lead up to as high as the President of the United States. After everyone who tries to help the law student is murdered, as a last resort, she contacts an investigative journalist.

As a good investigative reporter, he does his own research and tries to find another source to confirm the same findings. Naturally, it is not that easy given the fact that high level politicians and the government are involved. Nevertheless, we must highlight the role of the chief editor of the newspaper who does not allow him to publish the story until he has undeniable evidence that the findings are true. This is an essential element of ethical reporting, as the sole word of a student cannot be enough for an article, especially not for such a significant case.

Editors and chief editors have a lot of responsibility with respect to ethics, since they give guidance to the journalists and they have the power to stop publishing a story that lacks proof, accuracy and was obtained via bad sources or techniques.

In the movie there is a moment when they try to get into a health institute to find a person who could help them. However, it is not possible for reporters to visit patients so the journalist keeps the director of the institution talking while the law student sneaks in to find the person. Even if this lead them to the other source and they could reveal the conspiracy, it was still a questionable practice.

Investigating cases often ends with such situations when journalists cannot find what they need in the legal or ethical way. This will always be a dilemma as they want to verify their story but at the same time remain trustworthy and respectable.

Government related topics are especially sensitive as information might interfere with government or national interest. Journalists must conduct thorough research and must be confident that the information they are planning to reveal will not cause caos, on the other hand sometimes even shocking things must be uncovered to serve democracy and justice. But where is the line?

You can read more on Dissemination of Information: Government Interests, National Security and Freedom of Speech - How to Strike the Right Balance? the winner essay of the 2010 Ethicontest.

Disclaimer: This is a summary of a summary!

2011-11-13T03:46:00.001Z

Jim Romenesko, a well-known blogger had sold his blog to Poynter nearly twelve years ago. Having such close relations with the company, Romenesko never thought his partnership would end in a forced resignation. For what? It was not for libel, slander, or for malpractice. Instead, Poynter claimed that Romenesko spoke about their media reports without giving credit in each post. The fact that this drama occurred only weeks before Romenesko was to retire seems like Poynter had an ulterior motive (no pension?) It is especially odd because Romenesko was hired for the sole purpose of being a blogger that would summarize Poynter’s stories and news reports. He was to take the stories and compact them into readable, quick blog posts. Given the obvious and public partnership, Romenesko did not feel the need to give credit or use quotations in his summaries. Furthermore, he never once claimed the information in his posts as his own. It sounds like a bitter way to end such a great career- especially because Romenesko was one of the first pioneer bloggers to be bought by a large company. However, the 58 year old isn’t reacting like you might expect. Instead, he thanks Poynter for the success they have given him until this point, and he is going out as quietly as he can. It must help to know that he still has a loyal following. I suppose this teaches us to always ALWAYS cite your references, but also to have clear agreements with your partnerships before problems arise.

Source: NY Times blog

Journalist held captive for 6 months, now released

2011-11-07T04:10:00.000Z

This article is a perfect example of the risk that journalists take in their efforts to be public communicators. Paul Garay, a Peruvian television and radio host was sent to prison for over six months on account that somebody released a sound clip of a voice admitting that he was practicing unethical journalism and creating corruption. In addition to these statements, the voice confirmed that he had been sexually harassing young litigants. Whether true or false, this voice was said to be that of Paul Garay. Nearly six months after he had been in jail, the United States Supreme Court lifted the charges saying that the evidence was flawed. The recorded voice was never proven to be Garay’s confession, and the court found that the judge who convicted Garay had been previously involved in a lawsuit against him. Both of these points made the Supreme Court question why Garay had been found guilty in the first place.

This case teaches the severity of defamation, libel, and corruption. It also proves that even if a journalist practices ethical journalism, the fact that you are a public figure automatically makes you a target for scandals. We can only hope that the Supreme Court made the right decision to release Garay, and that in future cases perhaps they will be solved quicker.

Source: CPJ.org

Why So Many Blackouts

2011-10-31T14:48:00.002Z

In the last few weeks several media blackouts, a lack of airtime in the media, have occurred. The reasons behind these blackouts are varied and can include intentional blackouts or even the media simply not covering the topic.

Activists participating in “Occupy Wall Street” have placed blame on the media itself for the lack of airtime and have claimed that it’s really about “who owns the media” according to Journalism Professor Robert Jenson. Meaning those big corporations who own the media outlets have ties at Wall Street and don’t want to get caught reporting on a sensitive topic.

Ron Paul and his presidential campaign were under a media blackout as well until he asked his supporters to help him get the coverage in the media by donating money. His idea worked as his supporters have raised over $2 million to help get his message out to the voters.

Other situations can lead to self imposed media blackout such is the case for the family of missing baby Lisa. The family has been all over the media giving interviews and conferences in the hopes of finding baby Lisa. The blackout comes from the family wanting to take a break from the constant media attention.

Source: The Christian Post, The Hill, Ahram Online

Raped Or Not Raped That Is The Question

2011-10-29T09:00:00.000Z

The answer in this situation is not raped, especially when it concerns a fabricated story printed in the Scottish newspaper The Evening Times. The big issue here was a published report about a raped woman in Glasgow, who was mistreated in court and whose treatment led to her attempting suicide on several occasions. This woman’s painful ordeal consequently captured the attention of the Scotland first Prime Minister Alex Salmond, who pledged to look into the case. But the grim problem here was that there was no case, this story was based on fiction masquerading as fact and it highlighted issues concerning publishing stories of such nature.

Rape has always been a very sensitive subject to cover, and if it’s told in a wrong or insensitive manner its negative consequences can be great. In this case the story may not have existed, but the way the Scottish newspaper handled the situation was less than satisfactory for those criticising their approach.

So while the newspaper did apologize, they never stated that they were correcting their mistake, but rather pointed out that this was a clarification, in that there was a retraction of the story. This then was not taking lightly by the Scottish Rape Crisis organization. Who saw this as the newspapers way of preserving the myth that women lie about rape, even though it was their error to begin with, however there was no real ownership on their part.

This was another case in point for some to question the ethical conduct of the media, who admittedly made an great error by not fact checking, but possibly their biggest mistake in all of this was their conduct afterwards that failed to gather peoples understanding in this debacle.

Source: Stinky journalism

Celebrating a Murder

2011-10-29T00:52:00.004Z

There is no arguing with the fact that by the end of Kadhafi's rule over Libya he had become a widely hated man. His controversial way of managing the 3.24% of the world's oil supply as well as having little reaction to the humanitarian crisis in the middle east are two points of criticism one might have. Second, Kadhafi became a sour name in the United States because of his known involvement with US terrorism and anti-British/Zionist Resistance movements. Whether it was truly the attitude of the country mattered little to Kadhafi as some say he led the country ruthlessly, shooting people and causing casualties as if they had no consequence.

While I do believe Khadafi did not deserve any power in Libya or as a leader in general, I am still disturbed by the way in which his life ended. Any public that has gone unsatisfied for over 40 years is bound to revolt, so I understand the people celebrating his death. However, in terms of media ethics, how is it possible to release such images and videos that have been shared?

Months ago, when Osama Bin Laden was killed, many celebrated his death as well. While there were public images of his death, there was not any number close to that of Kadhafi's (not to mention there have been videos on youtube as well).

This is where the ultimate question, and one that I constantly struggle with answering, is: at what point do graphic pictures cross the line of necessary journalism? I fully understand that a reporter's job is to inform the world of current events. However in this case, the death of Kadhafi was a free-for-all -- allowing anyone to come observe the body and take pictures, non-journalists taking pictures at the time of the death, etc. These pictures became partially for entertainment of Libya and lost all respect for the fact that this was a heartless murder (justified or not, still a murder). I think that this story perfectly shows the progressive nature of Journalism that we are experiencing. With world news breaking on twitter, and average people getting personal pictures of such momentous events, we have all become journalists.

That being said, all of us need to respect the rights and ethics of fellow human beings. No matter how hated Kadhafi was, the number of graphic pictures and video surpassed the amount needed to accurately report the story to the public.

Source: mirror.co.uk

reference blog about Bin Laden's death

Fair Trial Or Press Freedom?

2011-10-28T20:18:00.002Z

It’s undeniable that the Casey Anthony news story was a big deal across the pond. America was for a while fascinated, captivated and horrified all at the same time. Her story was nothing new though, children disappear all the time, and thousands die a day. So the fascination wasn’t particularly about the tragic ending of a child’s life, but all the circumstances surrounding her mother and her part in what would become one of the biggest stories of 2011. The press had allot to do with making this one of the top stories of the year, but whether that is a good thing is disputed by the prosecutors and the defence attorneys. In front of 150 members of the Bar Association the discussion was centred on the topic of "Lessons in Ethics & Professionalism from the Casey Anthony Trial".

The important question that was being asked was what the effect the media coverage and commentary had on the case and the lawyers. If a fair trial was being requested for those that are being prosecuted then should the public have the privilege to know so much information because of the media? Doesn’t that damage the chances of justice for all those involved if they are already being judged in the media and consequently by the public?

This theory was backed by life death threats on the presiding jury of the case, whose names have been hidden till now, for their safety. So, intense the media scrutiny was that no one even the defence attorneys and their family’s personal safeties is protected. So if doing your job, becomes a security problem by all those that are engaging in the media circus, then it becomes detrimental to all those that are trying to seek justice.

Even though press freedom is extremely important, where do we draw the line? When does ethics come in to play, or is every big court case fair game and the public has the right to be updated on its progression?

Source: Orlando Sentinel

Publishing the photo of dead Gaddafi

2011-10-23T14:41:00.003Z

Many news outlets around the world, both print and online, published photos and even videos of the dead Lybian dictator. The opinions are contradictory as some claim that people have the right to see the proof of his death while others think it is disturbing and disrespectful. One can argue if he deserves any respect afterall.

We can question if it was really necessary. Does it make readers happy to see those pictures? What happens to the children who are exposed to the front page photos of newspapers on the street and homepages of websites? I suppose if you have children you would not sit down and show them these pictures by yourself explaining how goos it is that a dictator was killed.

In better cases, the pictures or videos are only viewable after a warning for disturbing content. At least those who do not want to see them would not be bothered. It is really unpleasant when you open your browser and the first thing you are confronted with is an irritating photo.

The death of Osama Bin Laden caused the same dilemma in May 2011 where president Obama decided not to release the photos to the public.

Source: Reuters

Media and Elections: Egypt

2011-10-21T11:53:00.002Z

Civic participation in electoral and democratic processes is fundamental to ensure that the government reflects the needs and the interests of the people and as a means of holding the government to account. One of the key components of this is participation in elections in an informed manner. The media can play a hugely important role in informing the public about the different voting options available to them and which party best fits in with their own personal ideologies. This is what true democracy should be about.

The information reported by the media is often not impartial especially in the lead up to elections with those with power able to influence what is reported and often more importantly, what is not reported. This is why the independent news website, set up by the Thomson Reuter’s Foundation (www.awatmasirya.com) in Arabic could prove to be an essential tool in aiding journalists, voters and the public in the lead up to the elections in Egypt. The idea is that this will be a completely independent news sources but that, crucially, it will be run by Egyptians for Egyptians, providing them with reliable information on everything concerning the electoral process.

The fledgling drive for democracy in Egypt relies on these elections being as free and fair as possible. With a media that had previously been influenced largely by Mubarek’s government now trying to find its feet, this website alongside the training on election reporting being conducted by the Thomson Reuters Foundation, if done correctly, could provide one of the key building blocks in reaching a truly democratic electoral process supported by a truly independent, impartial media.

The Egyptian people have not had the opportunity of choice of who will lead their country for at least fifty years. Many so-called true democracy are unable to conduct elections completely independently due to the media being influenced by politics (the UK being one example of this). It is now time for Egypt, with any help from external sources that is offered, to show the world what a true democracy should look like. They have the luxury of being able to start their democracy properly and any attempt to support this must be applauded.

Source: Reuters

Don’t Read This if You Haven’t Seen the Sixth Sense

2011-10-11T09:19:00.000Z

There are many media ethics issues that are of grave importance. There are some that are not so important and today we will look at one of these; namely, TV or film spoilers.

A spoiler is when in the process of reviewing a film or TV programme, the reviewer gives away a key element of the plot. For example, at the end of the Sixth Sense, the big twist is that Bruce Willis is actually dead. I have tried to use the most mainstream film twist possible. If someone is reading this who has not yet seen the Sixth Sense, they may be very angry that the plot has been given away.

An arts reviewer is mainly there to save people’s time. People read the reviews to gauge whether or not they want to experience the film. This puts the reviewer in a very awkward position as they must convey what is good or bad about the film without giving away key elements of the plot. If the really interesting, compelling element of a piece of work is the unexpected twist that occurs at the end, throwing everything you had thought previously on its head and giving the piece a completely different complexion, how can the reviewer convey this?

Is simply saying there is a twist at the end too much? Often this ruins the enjoyment of the entire thing as the viewer is sitting there throughout the whole thing trying to second guess what the twist is and the interesting twist gets lost in this game of ‘I reckon he’s actually his own sister’ twist guessing.

The reviewer also has to be aware that they have to play to two audiences. On the one hand, people are trying to make up their mind as to whether to see the film and on the other, people who have seen it and want to know whether the reviewer felt the same way about the film as they did. If the plot twist is not alluded to at all, these people may start questioning whether the reviewer actually watched the whole film or switched off before it was revealed that the Titanic sank.

Source: The Guardian

Picture Stirring Up Controversy

2011-10-10T01:57:00.002Z

They say a picture is worth a thousand words but in the case of this photo it could be worth several million words. The photo in question was published by a Turkish paper and shows the bloody body of a woman who had been stabbed to death by her husband.

It was printed on the cover to show the hypocrisy of the public according to the Editor-in-Chief Fatih Altaylı. He said the Turkish people have been “desensitized towards violence against women” and went on to add he would use this picture if it was his own mother

But this statement is just another way of showing the state of the media in certain countries and how ethics are not playing an important role. They want to sell papers regardless of the boundaries they are crossing. Without the journalists setting higher ethical standards for themselves, the Turkish media situation will not develop into something to be proud of and will continue to be the subject of controversy.

Source: World Bulletin

Personal Opinion in Media

2011-10-08T11:47:00.005Z

Alessio Rastini, once just an independent trader, has now become an over-night celebrity from the comments he made on a recent BBC interview. Rastini was introduced as an expert on the financial crisis but quickly overstepped his role as he made controversial comments that led people to question his motives. He left a BBC presenter stunned as he described his joy in a crashing stock market and his comment that “Governments don’t run the world. Goldman Sachs does” sparked questioning if he was a member of the Yes Men. After the BBC interview and the online debates, he was interviewed by a number of media sources to defend his role as an individual commenting on the market and to deny any association with a group or ideology. Whether he is a Yes Man or not, this controversy raises questions on the impact of those who are given an expert’s role in the media’s eye.

Rastini, in the role of the expert, should have presented an impartial and unbiased perspective of the economic crisis. Instead, he advised the audience to make money from the imminent market crash. Although he claims the ‘markets right now are ruled by fear’, he himself was using language that sparked fear in the audience. Outside experts are necessary in media to provide analysis but where do we draw the line with opinion? Can personal opinion be brought into media or does it only create distrust and controversy?

Source: Yahoo article

Does objectivity have a place online?

2011-09-30T02:13:00.001Z

According to Professor Stephen Ward, objectivity in the media is being questioned because the media outlets have evolved, but the definition of objectivity has not. In order to have clear expectations and understandings about the ethics of blogging, live reporting, and tweeting we must redefine ethics to be just as fast-evolving.

Objectivity: does it have a place in social media? To me, I read online news sources for my facts and I read blogs to hear others’ opinions about those facts. Making blogs and social reporting objective would defeat the purpose. So the only way to keep objectivity relevant is to redefine what it means. It used to mean the plain facts, but Ward insists that opinion can still be objective, as long as the opinion formed from an objective experience (not framed to make you feel a certain way). Ward is urging journalism programs across the nation to create specific guidelines for each format of online writing- When is it okay to ‘tweet’ a politician? What pictures are not okay to post on Facebook without crediting the source?

Ward also says that these new ethical guidelines should differ depending on the subject. Sarcastic writing would have less rigid rules than news stories. My one question that I am still wondering is: Is it ethical to have varying ethics depending on the subject matter? I think the only fair way to judge objectivity is if there is one blanket definition, not multiple. Comment back and let me know what you think!

source: Center for Journalism Ethics

Bad Journalists to be ‘Struck Off’

2011-09-29T17:14:00.001Z

The editor of the Independent, Chris Blackhurst, has come out in support of the proposal by Britain’s Shadow Culture Secretary, Ivan Lewis, that journalist who behave unethically should not be allowed to write newspaper articles. This came in the aftermath of Johann Hari admitting to large amount of plagiarism in his work.

The proposal would mean that journalist who wanted write for newspapers in Great Britain would have to have a license. If they were to behave in a way that was contrary to the license requirements, they would have their license taken away in a similar approach to how bad doctors are treated. It is hoped that this would lead to the public having greater respect for the media as they would see those that misinformed them not being allowed to do so again.

It is of paramount importance that if such a scheme was put in place, the body who decided whether or not a journalist could be ‘struck off’ was fully independent and completely politically neutral. Any politically motivated actions by this organisation would be extremely dangerous and would threaten freedom of speech within Britain. On the other hand, it would be useful to have an organisation whose sole aim was to find unethical journalism practices and who actually had some powers to prevent them from repeating in a way that the PCC currently does not..

Is this an approach that the Government should be taking in order to prevent unethical journalism? Or is this a dangerous scheme that could lead to many journalists being silenced when they do not write articles that the government agrees with?

Source: The Guardian

Why Twitter is a serious threat to society

2011-09-23T23:00:00.001Z

Being interesting to the public is not the same thing as public interest – superinjunctions are placed by courts for a reason, and breaking them on Twitter may be easy, but it is still contempt of court. When it comes to footballers’ sex lives, this may be easy to brush off as not of ethical importance – Ryan Giggs broke ethical codes, so why can’t we?

Does the media has a duty to respect the privacy of individuals? All journalists weigh up sensationalism vs lasting importance or impact of the story. In some arenas, selling copy is the foremost priority, and tabloid or yellow journalism is testimony to the backseat ethics sometimes takes for capital gains.

Twitter is often heralded as the ultimate tool of free speech, and it cannot be denied that Twitter is of enormous importance for spreading news and information quickly. But its abuse is dangerous, as this article points out.

Source: Cherwell

News Story or Advert

2011-09-23T22:00:00.002Z

Open any newspaper today and it is filled with adverts. These adverts are as we all know necessary in order for many newspapers to be published due to the huge amount of revenue they bring in when compared to the revenue generated from the sale of the newspaper. The income from these adverts can help to keep the press independent and not censored by whoever is financing the enterprise.

However, what cannot be tolerated is stories written as if they are news which upon closer inspection appear to be purely publicity vehicles for certain brands or products. For example, ‘Sugar Rush: 1000 queue around the block to get their hands on... doughnuts’ in the Daily Mail. This story was an enlightening ‘news’ story about how a doughnut shop had opened in Cardiff. Hold the front page! Another example is the article below from the Herald News on Tuesday with the shocking revelation that Wendy’s has just released a new burger. This article uses quotes from media spokespeople that are just adverts for the organisation. “Our food was already good,” said Denny Lynch, a Wendy’s spokesman. “We wanted it to be better. Isn’t that what long-term brands do? They reinvent themselves.” This. Is. Not. News.

Are these stories evidence of corruption within journalism with positive stories about certain products being exchanged for certain personal perks for the journalists or are they merely another example of lazy journalism where journalists too lazy to leave their desks happily turning press releases into news stories no matter how newsworthy those stories actually are?

Source: The Herald News

Journalists or activist? — Arabic Spring: Journalism in ethics crisis

2011-09-23T21:00:00.003Z

The recent uprising in the Arab world has attracted millions of people all over the world. Local journalists and journalists stationed there played a key role for the world to know what’s happening in the middle east.

While the world is applauding for the journalists there, one expert, Ali Jaber, has seen regional journalism in ethics crisis. He expresses his concerns that Journalists are playing activists and not journalists in the Middle East. “They (the journalists) are using media to (further) their own political agenda, bluntly”, he says.

Jaber is not a fan of citizen journalism that has been widely lauded, either. He is particular dubious about the sources of information used by citizen journalists. He doesn’t blame the journalists and the citizen journalists themselves, rather he sees the lack of professionalism a result of the lack of sufficient education in media ethics at school.

Objectivity is the key of ethical journalism. However, the dilemma is that journalists are human beings from different backgrounds who hold different views of the world. Jaber’s concern over the regional journalism in ethics crisis in the Arab world is thought provoking. In the mean time, it can be related to the global journalistic ethics as well.

Source: Dailystar

Negative racial stereotypes—Chicago TV station’s misleading interview

2011-09-23T20:00:00.003Z

In May, A Chicago TV station aired an interview of a 4-year-old boy as part of a story about teen shooting. The interviewer had a conversation about the gun after the teen shooting in his neighborhood. The interview started with the boy saying “I am not scared of nothing” and followed by the photographer’s question, “When you get older, are you going to stay away fro all these guns?” The boy answered no. With Curiosity, the interviewer asked the boy what is he going to do when he gets older, and the boy answered, “ I am going to have me a gun.”

The interview aired stopped here. However, the Poynter.org and The Maynard Institute got an email proving that the interview tells a totally different story. There is another portion of the interview with that 4-year-old boy. After the boy responded that he is going to have gun himself, the interviewer followed up with another question asking why. The boy answered, “ I am going to be the police.”—that is why he’s going to have a gun. The president of the Maynard Institute for Journalism Education, Dori J. Maynard, criticized the misleading interview “perpetuate negative stereotypes of boys and men of color” and appears to be “overtly criminalizing a preschooler.” The ethical mistake of the TV station not only spurred discussion and debates over the racial stereotype in the News, but also it raised concerns about how to deal with children sensitively and responsibly in news reporting.

Read a comprehensive guideline for interview Juveniles

The interview of the 4-year-old boy

Professionalism in News Broadcasting—The case of Julie Chen

2011-09-23T19:00:00.003Z

Julie Chen, a renowned host at CBS, was criticized for her lack of professionalism in broadcasting. In “The Talk”, when Julie Chen was reading the news that Casey Anthony had been found not guilty of killing her daughter, she couldn’t keep her composure, broke down and was unable to continue.

Jack Marshall, an ethicist and a lawyer, commented Chen’s case in his blog “Ethics Alarm”, concluded that
“1) A professional reporter is supposed to be able to read the news clearly, whatever it is.
2) A professional reporter is obligated to possess sufficient competence and experience to both overcome emotion and to shield listeners and viewers from her own views about the events being reported.
3) A professional reporter is obligated by objectivity not to be so invested in a particular outcome that she cannot report the news without being rendered mute by elation or disappointment.
4) A professional reporter is supposed to be professional. Walter Cronkite overcame his obvious emotion to clearly and accurately report the death by assassination of President Kennedy live on the air, November 22, 1963. Now, on the same network, one of his successors couldn’t muster the character and skill report that a nonentity had been acquitted of killing her daughter.”

Julie Chen’s case serves as an alert for today’s broadcasting industry to think about the professionalism and ethics in news broadcasting.

Source: Ethics Alarms

Global Media Ethics

2011-09-23T18:00:00.003Z

In the recent years, as new forms of communication are making the world smaller and smaller, the discussion about global media ethics is getting more and more attention. As Stephen J.A. Ward describes, the goal of setting up global media ethics is to develop a comprehensive set of principles and standards for the practice of journalism “in an age of global news media,” which can be adopted by most major journalism associations and news organizations.

The reasons for a global ethics can be given on two levels. On the practical level, local and parochial ethic is not adequate in the global news media age anymore. On the ethical level, global responsibilities are coming into being. The global media ethics treat the journalism’s “public” as the “citizen of the world” and stretch journalism ethics into a “cosmopolitan” perspective.

The components of global media ethics can be concluded into 3 sets of tasks: conceptual, research and practical tasks. The conceptual tasks aims at finding a new philosophical foundation for a global ethics. The research tasks are required to study the state of journalism in the context of globalization. Practical tasks are actions to implement and support the newly set standards.

As Stephen A. J Ward explains, a global ethics have three major distinct imperatives:
1) Act as global agents
2). Serve the citizen of the world
3). Promote non-parochial understanding.

However, as many people can see, a global ethics in journalism faces similar problem and obstacles as universal human rights. Does universal value really exist? Are ethics culturally-specific? Some constructionists argue that ethics depends on “finding” and “discovering”. Ethics are “constructed.” Can a global media ethics be “constructed” and accepted by the majority people in the world? What’s your opinion on a global media ethics?

Source: Center for Journalism Ethics, University of Wisconsin

Back to School for Johann Hari

2011-09-23T17:00:00.001Z

The Independent’s Johann Hari has apologized for the plagiarism that he had used in some of his articles underlining the importance of journalists always acknowledging sources and not just passing off the work of others as its own. He placed extracts of books and articles written previously into articles about interviews with certain people including interviews with Hugo Chavez (see link below).

He has voluntarily elected to take four months unpaid leave in order to attend training courses for journalists. Is this training really necessary? Every journalist knows that plagiarism is wrong even if they have not received any formal training. Hopefully, the importance of not plagiarising will be reiterated to Mr Hari during this training.

It is of utmost importance that any information taken from other sources is acknowledged for a myriad of reasons. Perhaps most importantly, the journalist’s integrity is lost if people are left unsure whether or not said journalist is telling the truth. Public faith is a hugely important factor in the impact that good quality, ethical journalism can have. If the author of an article has misled the reader about facts in the past, then they may not believe anything this journalist says in the future.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with pointing the reader towards an article or book they may not be aware of by quoting it. The reader must, however, be informed that the information was taken from this original source. Otherwise, in essence, the journalist is stealing the work of another. The words reused were sculpted by the previous author and placed into the public domain for others to observe. Reproducing this work and referencing the author is a form of flattery and also raises the profile of the original piece. Passing someone else’s work of us as one’s own is morally repugnant especially by a fellow journalist who understands the work that would have gone into creating the original piece.

What other reasons may there be not to plagiarise?

Source: The New Statesman

Experts and journalists discuss journalistic ethics in Ghana

2011-09-23T16:00:00.003Z

After a series of media events that disgraced the media ethics in Ghana, media ethics and journalists gathered together in the beginning of the year in a seminar on ethics.

The seminar raises many questions to the participants and media practitioners According to the participant in the seminar, such as “WHAT IS ETHICS”. According to the participants, ethic is “ a code of values which people by”, “a code or a set of principles by which people live”, and “considering and adhering to proper principles and practices in ones intention, decision, actions, motivations and obligations.” After a fruitful discussion, they launched their own code of ethics in Ghana (GJA Code of Ethics).

However, the participants left the seminar with some ambiguity on “what’s right in journalism?” This question is a significant one whose answer will facilitate journalistic ethics in Ghana directly. In the GJA Code of Ethics, public interests reigns over private interests. The definition of public interests can sometimes be tricky and subjective. After the GJA Code of Ethics, some journalists in Ghana are still calling for better definitions and better ethics education, especially on the recent GJA Code of Ethics.

What’s your definition of “what’s ethics”, “what’s right in journalism”, “what’s public and private interest?”

Source: Ethics Africa

The Importance of Telling the Truth

2011-09-23T15:00:00.004Z

In most societies, any attempt to silence the media through extremely strict defamation laws can be somewhat neutralized by simply telling the truth. If everything that is reported is based upon facts that can backed up with evidence, there can never be any valid accusations of defamation. Prosecutions for true and evidenced information that is in the public interest cannot be judged defamatory except by the most corrupt of governments.

This is a point that has been raised by Moeun Chhean Nariddh, the Director of the Cambodian Institute of Media Studies. In Cambodia, journalists face criminal sanctions if the judges deem their material defamatory. Due to fear of these punishments, journalists have increasingly begun to censor their work themselves, shirking away from writing articles about corruption or human rights abuses by the authorities. Nariddh argues that journalists should not be ‘afraid once they get these facts [within articles] correct.’

If everything a journalist writes is true, this will help the journalist in two ways. Firstly, there will be no legitimate case that can be bought against them for defamation as defamation by its definition is ‘a false accusation or malicious misrepresentation.’ If everything that is reported is true, no valid case for defamation can be brought against the journalist. However, this does not been that a case will not be brought against the journalist despite the story being true and well evidenced. This is where the second advantage of telling the truth comes in. If a journalist tells the truth all of the time, then the public will begin to acknowledge that they are trustworthy and this in time will lead to a strong relationship developing between the journalist and the public. The public will therefore not be as prepared to turn a blind eye against government sections on these journalists and the level of public support may lead to the authorities increasingly being forced to back down from their claims of defamation.

Fundamentally, as Nariddh points out, it is the obligation of the journalist to tell the truth about things that are of public interest. By engaging in self censorship, the whole truth is not told by the journalist. As has been briefly pointed out above, always telling the truth backed up by evidence should at least give the journalist some weapons against the authorities who try to silence them i.e. no legitimate legal eyes and widespread public support.

Source: Cambodian Journalism Review

Ethics of Human Trafficking Reporting

2011-09-23T14:00:00.001Z

Human trafficking is an extremely delicate matter for the media to report and reporting ethically on the subject is extremely important.

In the reporting of victim-based crime, there is a real danger of causing re-victimization. A “second victimization” can occur when the news media exacerbates a crime victim’s feelings of violation, disorientation and loss of control by printing details of his or her victim experience. When an article treats a victim of crime with a lack of compassion or portrays them merely as a victim rather than an individual, re-victimization can occur. Interviews with victims that force them to relive their experiences may trigger flashbacks or post-traumatic stress disorder. Making victims recount their stories in the public domain can also have a negative effect.

There is an additional risk that by identifying victims of human trafficking in the press, they will be targeted with reprisals by those angered by the victims speaking out about their treatment. Such angered parties may include the perpetrators or those connected to the crime who are not in custody. It can also exacerbate crime by sensationalizing particular crimes and writing detailed information about how the crime was committed. Increased public knowledge of crimes, especially those which are sexual in nature, can increase the risk of discrimination or further crimes being perpetrated against victims. As the public’s main source of seeing the law in action, it is of paramount importance that newspaper articles contain the correct law and are able to apply this law to the crime in the correct manner. Any discrepancies or confusion will be transmitted to the public.

The media can also harm innocent parties through creating or reinforcing stereotypes or negative images of certain people and practices. In this way, the media is a strong force in setting agendas for public discussion and shaping the public’s collective consciousness. It media also plays a key role in shaping the public perception of the current crime environment. On many occasions, the press will publish a story about a crime that has recently been committed with the suspect still at large. When there is no follow up, the public is left without knowing whether or not the perpetrator was brought to justice. The benefits of following a story until its conclusion are two-fold. Firstly, by continuing to follow up stories of cases that have not been solved, the journalist can apply pressure on to the law enforcement agencies and officials to continue investigating. Secondly, if a large number of cases publicly result in the perpetrator being sentenced, fears of impunity should decrease.

What other problems do you think unethical reporting on human trafficking stories could cause?

The Ethics of Using Child Models

2011-09-23T13:00:00.004Z

Thylane Lena-Rose Blondeau has been causing a storm and that is all to do with her appearance on the covers of the fashion magazine Vogue. Most of the criticism has been aimed at the fact that she is a 10 year old child, but been depicted by the magazine fashion heads as much older and more sexualised in her frames than is appropriate for a child her age.

By making her wear stiletto heels, a cleavage dress, provocative poses and putting on a red lipstick in front of a mirror, you wonder with who the responsibility lies for these child models.

The question is whether it is ethical to use child models in such provocative scenarios and where do we cross the line? Is it the mother’s responsibility or does the blame lie at the editors of Vogue as it was their creativity that brought this to life?

These are all legitimate questions as the safeguarding of children is placed in hands of adults and with that comes the responsibility of ensuring the physiological implications are not harmful.

Especially as there is a growing trend of using younger models by high profile designers, this leads to whether they are doing work that is age appropriate and whether the ensuing media publicity that is being done by them reflects their age groups. It is obvious that the photos that was taken of Thylane Lena-Rose Blondeau, could have easily be done by any adult female model, so was it necessary to put a child in such an imagery?

And while most of the outcry was about the sexualisation of the child model, it begs the question whether there is an over-sexualisation of children in publications and in the media.

In the fashion industry that’s what sells, but by allowing the child to be depicted in the same way as an adult, the fashion media has an ethical obligation to ensure that profits and public attention doesn’t override the safety of child models.

Source: Dailymail

The Deadened Silence of Media Ethics In Somalia

2011-09-23T12:00:00.002Z

Mohamed Saleeban once wrote a piece for WardheerNews titled “Pre-tuned Audience”. His view defines the state of the current Somali journalism in that “They are shy of speaking their conscience. Their content is predictable, if you are not writing what is expected of you as a priori by your pre-tuned bunch that surrounds you either physically or influentially, then you must be silent.”

That is what exists of the pre-catered hundreds of Somali news websites, everyone claiming to represent the whole of Somalia news media. But when taking in account the current situation that Somalia is in and the way its people is divided, perhaps that claim is far from the actual truth. These news sites are run by people that are affiliated with different tribes, with vested interests and patriotic views that may or may not clash with their way of reporting. But like any other distinctive websites, you have a certain audience that come there for a particular reason, and they demand to be updated on the state of their homeland. So people tend to be steered to those publications that share their viewpoints and are more critical to their antagonists.

However the lack of accountability lies also in the chaos that the country is in, where there are no specific laws to be abided, that is if you don’t include Al-Shabaab strict regulations that seem to comprise of terrorising their fellow citizens. With a government that is barely functioning and a continuous suffering of an entire nation, media regulations are not high priority.

The ethical standards that Somali journalists could have exercised also have been crippled by the many recent murders of Somali journalists in the region that have allowed everyone to fear for their lives. Reporting on issues doesn’t go without the reality of being terrorised by those that want to silence the truth, and without strict laws to deter them from killing journalists, the profession has become extremely dangerous in itself.

There are organizations like Somali Media for Peace and Development (SOMEPED) that try to educate, train and advocate journalists to adhere to a drafted code of ethics where self-regulation will become the basic norm for all those in the industry. It should be emphasised that the need for such practices is great, for there are many people outside the Diaspora that rely on news from home that is unbiased and reliable.

Source: Garoweonline

Should unethical journalists be punished?

2011-09-23T11:00:00.003Z

According to journalist Nyaronyo Kicheere, the Media Council of Tanzania should punish those who have gone against their ethics. He wants the MCT to have this power without any interruption coming from a government that he claims is “affected by corrupt officials.”

Even though many journalists have given in to the money offered for the unethical behavior, Kicheere asks other journalists to maintain their journalistic ethics so that the media might be respected once more. But this isn’t an easy task as sources are not as willing to come forward and provide information.

If this idea were brought up in the United States what would the reaction be? Could this idea of punishing unethical journalists work in the United States? What would the punishment be if there was one? What do you think?

Source: IPP Media

Hectic Year for Social Media

2011-09-23T10:00:00.002Z

It might only be September but Facebook and Twitter have already seen a fair share of controversy. From revolutions that began because of tweets to laws still deciding their fates, it has been an interesting 2011 for social media.

Earlier this year, Egypt and Tunisia both experienced changes in the government that were helped in part by Twitter. Researchers have looked at the tweets leading up to the revolutions and noticed that in Egypt tweets about political change increased from 2300 a day to 230,000 a day. In Tunisia, it was found that tweets and blogs about revolution were always followed by protests. To learn more you can check out Futurity.

In the United States, a law is trying to be passed stating that teachers and students cannot talk to one another through Facebook, e-mail or text messaging. The main goal of this would be to prevent any sexual misconduct between teachers and students. While this is a good idea, it is also stopping students from asking teachers questions about projects outside of school. To read more check out the link to the Examiner below.

Even with all of this controversy, Social Media is still becoming more popular with people joining every day. They can use it for good causes such as keeping in contact with friends and family across the country or they can spread rumors about possible kidnappings. Social Media itself is not a bad thing only the way it is used.

Source: Examiner and Futurity

Changing Climate Leads to Changing Media

2011-09-23T09:00:00.003Z

Under normal circumstances for a journalist, they try hard not to participate or be a member of what they are writing about. But how can a journalist have an unbiased opinion of the world that is changing in front of their very eyes.

At first journalists would try and make a balance when talking about the climate by taking many different perspectives and writing about them. Nowadays journalists go along with the information provided by scientists and the data they find. Because of this they report on the impact that people have been having on the climate in the form of global warming.

But after the many years reporting about global warming, many people have begun saying it isn’t real or it is just “climate fatigue.” So what are journalists supposed to do in the upcoming decades? Do they keep reporting on this even though no one really believes it or do they let it go and hope nothing comes of it? What would you do if you were a journalist?

Source: Journal

Is going undercover unethical?

2011-09-23T08:00:00.004Z

It’s an age old question. Should journalists go undercover, lying about who they are, in order to find and report the truth? From a journalists’ perspective it might be the only way to get the information. Others might argue it depends on the situation and the information that can be found.

Deceiving the public lowers a journalists’ credibility leading to less readership and potentially hindering a great future. But when an opportunity comes along that will benefit the public a journalist has to make a choice between getting that information and his/her career.

In the 1990’s, ABC made this decision when it broadcasted a video filmed by two undercover employees showing unsanitary practices at Food Lion. This was unethical as the two journalists did misrepresent themselves but the information forced Food Lion to clean up their act. This was a situation where the benefits far outweighed the negatives.

Their methods might be suspect but the knowledge they gain can be worth the deception. Would you read an article knowing what a journalist did to uncover the information?

Source: The Blaze

Evil sources

2011-09-23T07:00:00.004Z

A great case study. Information of obvious public importance is obtained from a source, perhaps illegally, who has his/her own private motives for its release. Drawing the line between professional obligation and personal accountability is very difficult here: selling a weapon to someone who told you they were going to murder their neighbour would make you morally reprehensible, even if you argued that you were just ‘doing your job’. Journalists are not immune from these responsibilities.

Motives can be secret, hidden, manifold – journalists always have to be careful. Source legitimacy is of paramount importance for the practise of ethical journalism.

Source: Media Ethics Magazine

A Picture Tells a Thousand Lies

2011-09-23T06:00:00.003Z

The recent riots across England have led to many questionable media ethics practices from the 24 hour news coverage that was said by many to have played a role in inciting the riots to the exaggerated scaremongering treatment of young people in England. This can be best illustrated by the way in which one photograph was captioned in two major newspapers.

This photo is of friends of Mark Duggan at his funeral. For those that do not know, it was the shooting of Duggan by police that was the spark at least for the initial rioting that occurred in Tottenham.

The Daily Mail thought this image summed up exactly how they wanted to portray the situation in order to increase the fear of the British youth amongst its readership. Their easy way of understanding what was occurring across the country was that Duggan was a gang leader, all of those who participated in the riots were part of the ‘fertile underclass’ involved in gang culture and that this was not anything to do with anything else, the treatment of the working classes or otherwise. This picture in their eyes proved their point and initial editions led with the headline ‘Gangster Salute for a ‘Fallen Soldier’. Within the article, the photo was described as ‘a chilling salute which should strike fear into the hearts of British people.’

However, the story was not what it seemed. The Guardian included in its report this passage: “As mourners prepared to set off from the house, the bishop called them to stand on the pavement beside the wooden carriage... He urged the mourners to stretch their arms towards the carriage as he prayed." This is what the moment at which the photo in question was taken.
There are at least two ways of reporting any news story. The ethical way to do this is to at least report what is truthfully occurring. If you do not know the story behind a photo, find out what is going on before you publish it. If you do know the facts but want to change them so they fit into the story you are trying to report, shame on you.

Source: The Media Blog

The difference between source and truth

2011-09-23T05:00:00.002Z

An interesting article about legitimacy of sources – in academia, the source is all-important. Journalism doesn’t quite have the same ideal, because it allows for a multitude of viewpoints. If you’re working on a long term investigative project, how much should you credit others for their help, and what should you expect in way of accreditation from others – say, an academic expert in the field who comes to you? This article also has important implications for the 'balance' of stories - in the USA, the principle of 'balance' is amongst about 50 which have just been scrapped as outdated codes of journalistic practice, as the public policy and political lag on climate change issues over the last 30 years has proved.

Stories need to be traced to their sources to be ethically legitimate. Sources must be cared for, and protected from potential backlash - but this article points out conflict of interest between the journalist him/herself which can often be overlooked and is a very difficult issue.

Source: Media Ethics Magazine

The Truth About War

2011-09-23T04:00:00.003Z

There is a famous phrase coined by US Senator Hiram Warren Johnson in regards to war and the truth, “The first casualty when war comes is truth," then again it is at times like this, when the media needs to do their best to report all the solid facts. The public relies on it, they become the eyes and ears of those at home that are watching all of it unfold.

Thus most dangerous situations for journalists to place themselves in, is without a doubt in the midst of a War. Where bombs, insurgents and bullets are indiscriminative of whom they target. But the journalists are there to expose the ugly reality of War, their reporting allows an insight for the rest of the world, which we otherwise wouldn’t be able to. But it isn’t like there is a complete unhindered all areas access for those reporters. In fact in conflict situations, like the War in Iraq, journalists who want to be safely situated within the American army, do so on the agreement that their stories will be vetted for “security” reasons. This practise hinders the freedom of speech that they might want to exercise, but not to do so is without the collaborations with the Army is on their own risk out there in the enemy ground. It allows for elective war propaganda to filter through our media, where media becomes a breeding ground for the views or information of those governments that want to manipulate the public for their benefit and objective judgements becomes annihilated.

But what if the question lay with the use of graphic and war related images, which could turn into provocation is it wise to withhold this information from the public or do we have a right to know regardless? And what about the differences between the different media networks, such as Al Jazeera and the BBC, where the former shares the unedited actual horrors of war casualties, whereas the BBC and networks similar in the Western world show the diluted version of the event. Are their journalistic values and ethical values of worst standards? If anything these issues allow us to ask where the boundaries for war reportage end and begin.

Source: Digital Journalist

How to rebuild public trust in journalism

2011-09-23T03:00:00.004Z

This article points to the Norwegian Press Industry Committee as an exemplar model for countries with toothless Press Complaints Commissions or strained relationships between media and government. At the current time, with Mudoch's British outfit News International under tremendous criticism for dishonouring the profession of journalism, PCCs are being called upon to act quicker and be given more powers. Of course, finding a balance between enough and too much power is difficult, and like so many other areas, Scandinavia appears to have gotten this balance right.

The UK, among others, could learn a lot from this model. Involving members of the public seems to be the best way to combat media outlets which are losing sight of their remits, and restoring faith in the relationship between those in power and journalists, by making their interactions public and democratic.

Source: Scoop

Ethics of Photojournalism

2011-09-23T02:00:00.002Z

When it comes to photojournalism, images speak all the words. Without a great image, a story appears less powerful. The power of Image is considerable strong, and with this brings a great responsibility. A good ethical conduct is required of those taking the pictures and distributing them for viewing. The job of a photojournalist is to capture a picture that speaks a thousand words and to tell the entire story by one glance. With pertinent words, visual messages are used at the same time to inform, entertain and sway. But the other concern to such photographic power is that pictures can equally insult, shock, deceive, stereotype and obfuscate.

In the following story a photo was taken of a 15 year old girl who was shot and killed by the police after stealing two plastic chairs and three framed pictures. The pictures were gruesome and shocking. Here was a dead child that was shot dead for completely meaningless reason, but more harrowing were the pictures of the photographers that were taking the images of the child. They looked like a bunch of scavengers looking for the best image disregarding the disturbing sight in front of them: A dead child. The casual behaviour of those journalists stopped making it look like reporting; instead it looked like a group of voyeurs who seemed to be ill-using this tragic moment.

To make matters worse the same dead girl was shown in The Guardian newspaper to be in a different pose, where it looked like she was moved to allow a different pose to be captured.

This brings up questions of the ethical conducts of photojournalists in situations like these. It prompted us to ask questions of what we benefit from images like these?

Were these pictures shot in good taste? Should sensitivity be shown to dead people? Or what if it was a dead child, should they be excluded from news coverage? Is the value of a story greater than protecting the vulnerability of children or is reducing harm greater than the public’s right to know? What is the ethical responsibility of photojournalists at moments like that?

What about the modification of a photo, is it acceptable, or should the picture painting reality at no time be altered? Is the depiction of reality greater (or at best more expedient) than reality itself?

Professor Kenneth Kobre once argued that photojournalism has no Bible, no rabbinical college, no Pope to define correct choices.” There is no single intercessor of what is or isn't ethical, and even if there were, the line isn't always black and white.

Perhaps that is the first most thing we have to keep in mind at all costs regardless of the story, and this tragic news story certainly seems to elicit that. Is that “Journalists and news organizations have a moral obligation and professional duty to show respect for human beings,” Reporter Bob Steele (Occupational Outlook Handbook, 2004-05 Edition).

Source: Erickimphotography

Ethics involved with sports as well

2011-09-23T01:00:00.003Z

Ethical problems in the sports industry are not as noticeable as those faced by news journalists. But one of the biggest issues facing sports journalists is the media owned teams. Another issue is the possibility of receiving gifts creating a conflict of interest.

Time Warner, one of the biggest media companies, owns both the Atlanta Braves and the Atlanta Hawks while also owning the television station TBS. This television station has the exclusive on all Atlanta Braves games creating issues about game coverage. The Tribune Company, owner of the Los Angeles Times and The Chicago Tribune, also owns the Chicago Cubs. Owning many of the newspapers creates a conflict of interest for the journalists who might be under pressure to write press favoring the Cubs.

When it comes to baseball, spring training can be a big part of the season. With camps taking place in Arizona and Florida, many journalists have to travel to the camps in order to get preseason highlights. The problem with this is that some of the best writers have received all-expense paid trip to the camps so they will be the ones to cover the training.

So sports fans, what do you think of these situations or did you even know about them?

Source: Ethics in Sports Media

Self Restraint vs Self Censure

2011-09-23T00:00:00.006Z

Britain’s D Notice Committee has existed for a century. Senior editors and the government meet twice a year to discuss what should be kept secret in the interests of national security. Realistically, there’s no such thing as a media blackout anymore – someone somewhere will take a picture on their iPhone or Tweet sensitive information without realising it. If British papers or media outlets agree censorship rules before stories are even published, how can accuracy be maintained.

The media has no obligation to listen to the British government whatsoever. So why does this committee still exist? Can’t the media regulate itself? This seems to be a pretence at 'ethics', but it has insidious political overtones. The media is capable of regulating itself and governmental interference is a) hard to measure and b) will impair a journalist's/outlet's claims to impartiality. Wikileaks shows that sometimes information can be released which is classified/sensitive. But if someone on the internet somewhere will publish this things anyway, it seems irrational to handicap respected media outlets.

Source: BBC

Jordan’s New Media Legislation marks a step back for reforms

2011-09-15T23:23:00.000Z

The recent protests of Jordan’s journalists reflects mounting pressure from the increasing popularity of New Media. Newspaper journalism has a history of restricting legislation preventing freedom of reporting and causing ethically challenging choices for journalists. As a result, research suggests, Jordanians are turning to New or International Media as a way of accessing free press. A large percentage of the population receive satellite TV and a rising number of people comment and express opinions on events on websites. The people’s desire for free press is putting pressure on journalists who are prevented from printing and publishing as freely as those online.

The introduction of a provisional law restricting media websites freedom by requiring them to register as media companies, shows the government’s reaction to the public’s growing interest. This law equates independent journalists to criminals and gives licence to governmental crackdowns on bloggers and media websites.

Increasing pressure of new media on newspaper journalism has also led to complaints of falling levels of professionalism and ethical reporting. Stories run on little research and rumour are inevitable amongst other issues of bias writing and inexperience. The public’s desire for reporting beyond the government legislation is leading Jordan’s journalists into a conflicting world of government restrictions in publications and online. How can the media make a cohesive reform strategy when the Jordanian journalists are divided on New Media?

Terrorism on Twitter

2011-09-13T13:45:00.000Z

A new case emerging from Mexico, which started with tweets about violence, could change the landscape of Twitter in the country. On August 25, users of Twitter began tweeting about attacks at schools including bomb threats and kidnappings. Parents of school age children began to frantically reach their children trying to save them from possible harm leading to hysteria within Veracruz.

It was later revealed to be a plot “to generate terror” that succeeded. Twitter had already become a common way to share news of violence amongst the people living in Mexico explaining why the parents were so quick to believe these tweets. The trust in Twitter comes from other forms of media losing credibility as many have stopped covering violence because of threats.

Protestors even began to demonstrate outside of the Veracruz state’s Congress to get the suspects released citing freedom of expression. But this kind of situation can be tricky according to experts since it isn’t a clear cut situation. Is it just freedom of expression or is it an act of terrorism as the government believes?

Source: CNN

‘Grief Porn’ in the Media

2011-09-12T12:16:00.001Z

The recent anniversary of the September 11th attacks on the two World Trade Centre towers has led to an unprecedented flood of media coverage of the people who lost loved ones, with large numbers of photos published of people in mourning.

The media should be challenged with regards to whether these images are necessary or if grief should be viewed as something personal to the individual suffering and not something to be broadcast around the world. There is a fine line between telling people’s stories in a respectful manner and intruding in someone’s life at the time when they are most fragile.

When people do not grieve in what the media believes is an appropriate manner, the sympathetic tone with which the relatives of the bereaved are written shifts to something a lot more sinister. As someone is not weeping in the required manner providing the images that the media desires when faced by its glare, the media has often turned onto this individual subtly (or not so subtly) suggesting that they may be reacting in this way as they have something to hide. The treatment of Joanna Lees and Kate McCann in recent times are clear examples of this.

It is not a prerequisite of a traumatic news story to have images of family members visibly grieving. These people have not chosen to be in the public eye, especially in the immediate aftermath of the tragedy. The media, and the public who consume the media, need to stop this demand for so-called ‘grief porn and they should allow those suffering to the privacy that they require.

Source: The Age

Journalists Turned to Bullies

2011-09-11T18:51:00.000Z

If somebody told you the world was going to end within weeks, how would you react? Some people would react seriously and try to prepare for the impending Rapture, and some simply would not. Harold Camping, an American Radio Host and preacher, has warned the public that the world will end October 21, 2011. Harold finds source from the Bible and says that this will be a modern Judgment Day. This story may sound familiar, because this isn’t the first time Camping has predicted an apocalypse. According to his sources, Camping had claimed that on May 21, 2011 the world was going to end. Even if he was wrong, we were too.

The media took this story and spun it to make Camping look like a crazy old man. It may have been the easiest way to report on such a threatening claim, but Camping’s story should have been taken seriously rather than being mocked by journalists. http://www.blogger.com/img/blank.gifThe Associated Press and CNN, both widely read news sources in America, released sarcastic articles poking fun at Camping’s logic. CNN’s article, titled “It’s NOT the end of the world as we know it,” undermined Camping and made a joke about his religious prediction. Both news sources received many complaints about the way they responded because, in a country where freedom of speech and freedom of religion are encouraged, this specific case did the opposite for Camping.

If anything, this upcoming warning about October 21 can be seen as a second chance for the media to practice ethical reporting. At the very least, October 21st will be Judgment Day for the media because the whole country will be judging their coverage of Camping’s “apocalypse”.

Source: Stinkyjournalism.org

Beijing takes over leading newspapers

2011-09-06T09:12:00.000Z

Beijing's propoganda bureau has taken over two of the most influential newspapers in China, the Beijing Times and the Beijing News. This has been seen as an attempt to prevent free reporting on major incidents in China and across the world. After the Wenzhou crash, officials issued directives underlining that journalists should focus on positive reporting. Some newspapers risked censorship by reporting through images or parallel stories that alluded to events. The Economic Observer's image of the train wreck encircled by the red logo of the railway ministry and the Beijing Times front report of the ancient pottery smashed into the same number of pieces as the train carriages showed some attempt to report the extent of the crash.
Weibo, China's twitter, has an important role to play in this diregard of official's directives. Netizens on Weibo accused the government of attempting to censor the media and cover-up the causes of the crash. Photos and videos were posted of the real events occuring in Wenzhou on Weibo and although it is censored, there was little the government could do to prevent the spread of information. Weibo is becoming increasingly important in reporting what is left unsaid by newspapers. Although Beijing's move to control and censor media post-Wenzhou shows a crackdown on journalists' dismissal of directives, the bigger and more long term problem for officials lies in the Internet and social media. How will the Chinese government stop netizens from reporting freely?

Source:The Guardian

The Lack Of Ethics In Vogue Italia And Their 'Slave Earrings'

2011-09-03T03:23:00.000Z

When Vogue Italia highlighted the newest fashion craze accessories of hoop earrings as “Slave Earrings”, it probably didn’t foresee the media storm it would create. The magazine found itself at a centre of a race row with the following excerpt and its controversial headline of ‘Slave Earrings’:

“Jewellery has always flirted with circular shapes, especially for use in making earrings. The most classic models are the slave and creole styles in gold hoops.

"If the name brings to mind the decorative traditions of the women of colour who were brought to the southern United States during the slave trade, the latest interpretation is pure freedom. Colored stones, symbolic pendants and multiple spheres. And the evolution goes on.”

Outraged reactions were felt all over and it highlighted the lack of ethical judgement of certain journalists when deciding to use insensitive language and blasé attitude to touchy subjects such as the slave trade.

And to further indignation of commentators after receiving their fierce backlash through social networks sites such as twitter, Vogue decided to change the word slave earrings to “ethnic earrings” suggesting even further that those two words are interchangeable. Which eventually led to the whole article being removed, and an apology issued. But not before grave harm was done to the celebrated magazine credibility and cultural sensitive towards its readers.

But perhaps through all of this it is of great significance that it was the public who first noticed the serious lack of judgement and decided to call out those in charge for their unethical practices.

Nevertheless the essential question is whether you think that the public outrages that arises through situations like these will only help benefit eradication of these practises and establish higher journalistic and ethical standards or maybe you think that it will have no effect.

Source: Guardian

Importance of Media Training in Post-Conflict Revolutions

2011-08-31T14:34:00.000Z

With the recent upheaval of authoritarian regimes during the Arab Spring, the need for ethical media training is hugely important in these areas. In countries where for decades the media has been largely controlled by the State it has been extremely hard for journalists to behave ethically as they did not have the independence that ethical journalism requires. Now is the time for these countries to forge a new ethical media system in order to help maintain the free and democratic societies that these revolutionaries were fought for.

Shahira Amin, the Egyptian state television anchor stated in a recent interview with the Guardian that the journalists left in Egypt are not used to going out in the field to gather news. Under the previous regime, they were fed press releases by the Government which they would then turn into stories without witnessing the events for themselves. According to Amin, these people ‘aren’t real journalists – they just want to get paid.’

However, there are positive signs. Many new independent newspapers and news channels have become established since the revolution. Also, a large number of activists have become so-called ‘Twitter celebrities’ with thousands of people globally following their news updates. If these people are trained to report in an ethical and independent manner, they can potentially lead Egypt into a new age of ethical, democratic news reporting.

Source: The Guardian

Shocking People the Wrong Way

2011-08-29T02:52:00.000Z

ESPN the Magazine recently ran an article titled “What if Michael Vick Were White?” This article basically describes the life Vick would have had if he had been born white and whether his career would have been affected.

While this article has created great debate about race and the role it plays, more debate has begun about the ethics behind the article. Hank Koebler, sports writer, even goes as far as to call it “distastefully bad journalism” that was only created as a means to shock people.

While this may be true, you can be the judge and let us know your opinion about the article.

Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/hank-koebler/espns-whiteface-vick-is-d_b_938930.html

The ethical issue that is Norway versus Amy Winehouse

2011-08-22T23:13:00.000Z

The ethical issue that is Norway versus Amy Winehouse
During the time of the terror attacks in Norway and Amy Winehouse death, there was a strong debate going on in the social networking sphere, who is deemed more “deserving” of news coverage. It opened up a discussion of which news stories are more significant than others. But in fact it was also a question aimed at the nature of media houses what they deemed more “sellable” and more viewer attraction. Here we have two stories that are both tragic and controversial, but the need for a moral ethical judgement of media executives to decide the best course of action is crucial at times like this. It’s an uncomfortable feeling as no one death is more inferior, but it does raise the important issue of media ethics and the hierarchy of death. Below is a perceptive article that allows us to ask that question.

Where the author Roy Greenslade observes that the death of Amy Winehouse is a life story that we have followed from the beginning and were we are able to identify and become familiar with the deceased person. We didn’t have that luxury with those that died in the Norway massacre, they were anonymous victims to and harder to identify with. So maybe this begs the question that even after death there is still subjectivity?

Source: Guardian

Who's To Blame?

2011-08-21T19:29:00.000Z

With the recent scandal that has erupted in the world of journalism, and caught everyone’s attention, it begs the question “who’s to blame” for the lack of ethical thinking. It could be the journalists who write the articles and are therefore responsible for how the material is retrieved. On the other hand, journalists wouldn’t have to keep finding new ways to gather information if people didn’t keep reading the articles.

The first to be blamed is usually those in charge of the reporting, the journalists and editors themselves. They are the ones who get caught allegedly hacking phones or trying to break into sealed records in order to find the truth. Those that are not thought about are the readers who are interested in information that is true and interesting but in recent years have become more interested in tabloid like articles. This is where the information may not necessarily be true but it is interesting and controversial. It captures the readers’ attention and gets them to buy the papers.

To better understand how journalists and readers affect one another, check out J-Ethinomics. This is a combination of ethics, journalism and economics that was created to try and build trust in the news through the use of ethics. Training in J-Ethinomics can lead to more honest reporting, a renewed trust in the news and a better consumer relationship.

This information begs the question: will readers respond to ethical reporting or sensationalism? You be the judge.

Source: http://www.abc.net.au/local/stories/2011/08/07/3287542.htm

BBC fabricated tribal TV series

2011-08-20T22:57:00.000Z

After the BBC’s tribal TV series was exposed to be fabricated and edited to such an extreme that most of it was staged for the public entertainment and ridiculed everything that the Matsigenka tribe stood for. It impelled the Survival international organization to establish practical ethical guidelines for filmmakers to follow. The code of conduct stresses the importance of the filmmakers to establish an unprejudiced and impartial view of tribe’s people. But it also highlights that the moral conduct extends to more than just the usual communities of blacks, Jewish or gay. By endorsing the ethical guidelines of Survival international there is now a clearer view for filmmakers that they possibly can’t ignore.

Questions to be asked is whether exploitation is also taking place in circumstances likes this, and whether people know what they bargaining themselves for. Perhaps they do and the choices they make are largely on themselves as well. Anthropologists, who deal with the tribe studies on a professional basis, whereby they emerge themselves completely in their way of life, have a rigid ethical code to follow. Break those and you will be ostracised and lose credibility in the professional community. TV and its images is a far reaching medium and the implications of distorting the truth is magnitude as its able to change and form public opinion, which makes it only more essential to take on the same no nonsense attitude that anthropologists have towards ethical breaches.

Stephen Corry allows us to further question the ethical effects of the media when he said that “If tribal peoples are portrayed as ‘savage’ or ‘Stone Age,’ the public will believe this to be true. This can lead to the theft of tribal lands and resources by governments and corporations. Negative portrayals feed negative stereotypes which can underpin systematic and gross violations of human rights”.

Source: Survival International

Do you really know what public interest means?

2011-08-17T13:17:00.000Z

http://www.bjr.org.uk/data/2007/no2_moore

A great article about the responsibility of journalists to inform, analyse and educate their audiences. Too often the idea of impartiality is bandied about, sometimes to the detriment of what people should know, and what people want to know.

How can we tell what is public relations churnalism or government propaganda? Are their ever times where journalists should work with these bodies? Martin Moore in the British Journalism Review may not have all the answers, but he knows what he's talking about.

Daily Mail Guilty of Sensationalism?

2011-08-16T11:27:00.000Z

The Daily Mail has been accused by the Guardian of sensationalism over the front page of their paper on the 15th August. The headline of the story was ‘Shame of Riot Rapist’s Family’ and it spoke of how a teenage boy raped a thirteen-year-old girl ‘at the height of last week’s riots in Woolwich, London.’ It showed a picture of Woolwich engulfed in flames to further underline its point.

The horrific incident did not happen at the ‘height of last week’s riots’, it happened the day after. Woolwich was not engulfed in flames at the time but all of the fires had already been extinguished and order had, on the whole, been restored.

A story about a 15-year-old mugging and then raping a 13-year-old is horrific enough without trying to sensationalize it by exaggerating the circumstances under which it took place. This is a clear example of the media ‘bending the truth’ in order to make the story more colourful. All journalists are guilty of this but usual in far less harmful ways. By describing this incident in this manner, they are trying to maximise the sense of outrage using the 13-year-old rape victim as a pawn in this game. Journalists should report crime stories how they actually occurred and not place them within a scenario that would create a more ‘interesting’ story.

Source: The Guardian

Rape reporting: over and under estimation

2011-08-11T08:26:00.000Z

This is a very insightful article which points out the problems of reporting rape during war and peace time. How can journalists avoid estimations and guess work - is it possible to accurately report rape? The source points to outlets such as the BBC reporting ludicrous figures. Where do they come from?

How can we tackle this problem without distorting the facts and consquently efforts to stop rape and other war crimes?

Source: Rape reporting during war

Prejudice and conjecture over Norway

2011-08-03T09:36:00.000Z

I followed the terrible events in Norway on 22/7 as they unfolded, rooted to aftenposten.no and constantly refreshing a Twitter search for #oslo. As a city that used to be my home, and a community I was a part of, I was deeply upset by the atrocity inflicted on such a peaceful, trusting country. The thought that it could have been a jihadist group filled me with fear and anger, and until about 6pm (UK time), it was assumed that it was indeed a jihadist group that was behind the attack. No other possibility was considered by the BBC, Sky, and any of the American news networks. Even when a gun man was identified as a blond Norwegian speaker, the first reaction by these news agencies was 'he must be a convert to Islam'.

If Brevik had indeed been Muslim, he would still be being referred to as a terrorist by the media. Instead, he is an 'assailant', 'attacker' (Reuters), 'gunman' (BBC, CNN, Al Jazeera). Is 'terrorist' a term reserved just for Muslims?

The US Department of State called the tragedy an 'act of violence', not an 'act of terrorism'.

This article from British columnist Charlie Brooker tellingly exposes the hypocrisy and prejudice with which that awful day's events were reported:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/24/charlie-brooker-norway-mass-killings

In Defence of Investigative Journalism

2011-07-31T17:35:00.000Z

After the phone hacking scandal that has harmed the English press and the practise of investigative journalism immensely, it is important to remember the role good, ethical, investigative journalism can play. Being able to investigate and broadcast information relating to corruption or ‘wrongdoing’ is one of the most important ways in which the media can benefit society. Journalists must not be discouraged from investigating stories thoroughly and exposing scandals in light of the recent news. When investigative journalism occurs and ‘scoops’ are obtained, it can provide extremely interesting and sometimes iconic stories that have global repercussions.

In light of this, have a look at this list on the link below of what the Observer believes are the ten best newspaper scoops of all time with one even from the recently closed News of the World. Do you have any other examples of scoops that showed the power that investigative journalism can have when it is done correctly?

It must be remembered, however, that investigative journalism can only reach its full potency if the investigation is carried out ethically. Any immoral action during the investigation tarnishes the story in the same way as unethical policing methods can lead to a criminal case being dismissed. The story loses a lot of its credibility as soon as it is discovered that it was obtained using unethical means. The majority of the public often take a ‘people in glass houses should not throw stones’ attitude towards the unethical way in which the story was obtained and it therefore loses a lot of its power.

Link: The Observer http://www.guardian.co.uk/culture/gallery/2011/jul/31/10-best-newspaper-scoops-in-pictures

Can journalists be politicians?

2011-07-30T09:11:00.000Z

Since journalists are human beings and individuals it is natural that they have their own opninion and preferred political parties. However, when writing they tend to reflect their own opinion and political stand in their articles. In Hungarian newspapers you immediately know the stand of the news agency when you read their news.

An interesting conference took place in Transylvania among Hungarian-Romanian journalists about the relationship between politics and journalism. Each field has its own ethical rules and they are not by all means the same. Therefore it creates confusion if the two are mixed. But it often happens journalists reporting on politics get involved and carry on their journalism career while pursuing politics and their articles usually clearly reflect this. Should this be allowed? One reading the article would not know if it's the message of a public representative or a report of a journalist.

Independent media is important to keep the public informed without influencing them. If readers see objective reporting they have the opportunity to formulate their own opinion more freely.

Source: Magyar Szó

Skinny babies are always there, just not always in the news

2011-07-21T11:14:00.000Z

So the Disaster and Emergency Committee (DEC) has launched an appeal for aid in the Cape of Africa, but without the support of the BBC, according to AlertNet, this could never have happened.

In this source, the journalist talks to a nutritionist who points out that 32 children were admitted to their hospital with severe malnutrition in May 2011, just before the UN declared Somalia to be the worst drought in 60 years, but 40 were admitted in December. Drought and starvation are perennial problems in this part of the world but the media only appears to care occasionally.

As journalists we must balance a difficult line between creating a narrative and highlighting individual stories in order to engage our audience and at the same time trying to hold the bigger picture in mind. But, as this article points out, the media can be so desensitised to its subject, it can get the balance wrong.

Source: http://www.trust.org/alertnet/news/starvation-pornography-how-many-skinny-babies-can-you-show-me/(via

Wikileaks: A conversation on media ethics

2011-07-15T14:34:00.000Z

User Generated Content - is it journalism?

2011-07-15T14:15:00.000Z

How can we verify the work of citizen journalists - is it even journalism?

The extent to which it affects the editorial processes of story selection and publication is one of great debate. If it reflects public opinion and public interest, this must be a good thing - but how do we know that these sources are accurate and tell the whole story? What must journalists take into account before using it?

Source: http://blog.comscore.com/2011/07/social_seo_facebook_twitter_be.html

Journalists' Hippocratic Oath

2011-07-12T17:47:00.000Z

Due to the recent phone hacking scandal, media ethics is in the public eye far more prominently than in recent times. In an article in the Guardian, George Monbiot has called for journalists to develop their own version of the Hippocratic Oath. This, he hoped, will lead to journalists to have to answer to the public and not just their proprietors. He admits that this would 'not directly address the power relations that govern the papers' but 'might help journalists to assert a measure of indepence' and also give the public a certain of standard of journalism that they would be able to demand.

The proposed oath is as follows;

'Our primary task is to hold power to account. We will prioritise those stories and issues which expose the interests of power. We will be wary of the relationships we form with the rich and powerful, and ensure that we don't become embedded in their society. We will not curry favour with politicians, businesses or other dominant groups by withholding scrutiny of their affairs, or twisting a story to suit their interests.

"We will stand up to the interests of the businesses we work for, and the advertisers which fund them. We will never take money for promulgating a particular opinion, and we will resist attempts to oblige us to adopt one.

"We will recognise and understand the power we wield and how it originates. We will challenge ourselves and our perception of the world as much as we challenge other people. When we turn out to be wrong, we will say so."

Source: The Guardian

Dirty journalism takes on public significance

2011-07-08T10:48:00.000Z

This week Rupert Murdoch's News International empire has been further disgraced after allegations that The News of The World, a top selling British tabloid, illegally hacked into the mobile phone voice box of several victims in murder cases and victims of the London 7/7 bombings. These hackings took place whilst school girls Milly Dowler, Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman were still missing, and the paper actually deleted messages as Dowler's inbox became full, seriously jeopardising the police investigation. Phone hacking made headlines last month, but it was only politicians and celebrities affected, and the scandal was forgotten. This time, as more and more accusations continue to surface, the implications are obviously much more serious. But how can a free press regulate itself when some journalists are prepared to go to these lengths for the story?

Phone hacking is not just an invasion of privacy which goes against everything good journalistic practice stands for: in these cases it could have disastrous results because people's lives and justice are at stake. 38 Degrees, a grassroots campaigning movement in the UK, is calling on the UK government to stop Murdoch's take over of BSkyB this week, which would give Murdoch unprecedented control over the British media. Should one man/organisation have so much control over the national media? How do we prevent organisations with questionable ethical practices from dominating in a free market?

Source: www.38degrees.org.uk

The Silencing Crime: Sexual Assault in Journalism

2011-07-04T17:14:00.000Z

A recent report published by the Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) is attempting to draw attention to the problem of sexual violence conducted against journalists. It has previously been deemed to be a somewhat taboo subject due to both cultural and professional stigmas attached to sexual violence, especially in connection to the issue of female journalists.

Although journalists of both sexes have come forward to discuss the sexual abuse that they have been subjected to in the course of carrying out their jobs, it is the reasons that journalists do not talk about abuse that is perhaps the most worrying aspect of the report. Many journalists are reluctant to disclose an assault to their editor ‘for fear they would be perceived as vulnerable and be denied future assignments.’

It would be skirting the issue to not discuss how this affects female journalists far more then male journalists. Journalism is an extremely competitive career with editors constantly weighing up the attributes of different journalists to decide who to send on certain assignments. Anything that is perceived as a weakness may mean that one journalist gets an assignment ahead of another. It is the fear that editors will consider victims of assault too vulnerable to send on the some assignments that has led to this stigma surrounding sexual assault to become prevalent. In many countries, women face a lot of battles to show that they can be judged by the same conditions by which men are judged. By casting themselves as vulnerable to sexual assault, this battle is often lost in the perceptions of many editors.

This must be addressed. Anyone who suffers serious sexual assault should feel comfortable to report this assault safe in the knowledge that this will not affect their reputation or their employer’s perceptions about how well they can do their jobs. Currently, female journalists are being punished twice – primarily by the sexual assault itself but the secondarily by the feeling of shame that it means they are not suited to their jobs. Any form of violence commit against people should not lead them to be viewed as less able to do their jobs. Hopefully, this report by the CPJ and the subsequent investigation that follows will help remove the stigma from this issue.

Source: Committee to Protect Journalists http://cpj.org/reports/2011/06/silencing-crime-sexual-violence-journalists.php"

Tabloid Press Mirroring an Authoritarian State

2011-06-24T10:11:00.000Z

The tabloid media, according to a former British judge, is mirroring the behaviour of an authoritarian state. The recent controversy surrounding super injunctions and the media claiming they have a right to publish personal details about celebrities contrary to the European Convention of Human Rights has caused Stephen Sedley to suggest this in a recent essay.

The Sun Columnist Jane Moore summed up the tabloid media's view by stating, ‘if you don’t want your private life splashed all over the press, then behave yourselves.’ The tabloid media is going above and beyond their duty in reporting what is occurring that is of public interest to now forcing people to live their lives in a certain way. It is only if they live their lives in a way that the press deems responsible that they should not fear the press. What right does the tabloid press have to impose their own morality on the lives of others, less they be exposed as flouting the ‘moral life’ decided upon by the press themselves?

Sedley argues that ‘the fourth estate is close to being a state within the state, unregulated except to the modest extent that it chooses to regulate itself and alternately feared and pandered to by public figures.’ Furthermore, the tabloid press defends this voyeuristic stance by claiming a public duty to expose 'moral misdemeanour' in order to stop these stars being role models for young people, arguing that exposing this type of sexual promiscuity will put off the young teenagers who idolise these personalities. It appears very short sighted that a 14 year old boy who idolises a footballer will stop idolising him after it is revealed that he has had sex with a lot of different women. The tabloid press needs to move away from their so-called moral stance regarding these intrusions into people’s privacy and admit that the reason they want to be able to publish these stories is in order to increase the distribution of their papers.

Source: London Review of Books

'Checkbook Journalism' and journalistic ethics

2011-06-21T03:49:00.000Z

The discussion about “checkbook journalism” has been intensified as ABC News confirmed rumors that they offered $10,000 through a broker for photos of the “Botox Mom” and her not-Botoxed daughter. As news channels continue their endless competitions for viewers, they are willing to open checkbooks for juicy interviews and stories. Here comes the question: Are these license fees paid by the news networks ruining journalism's integrity?

It is no doubt that paying for stories is against the journalistic ethics and hurts journalism’s credibility. The Society of Professional journalists has issued major statement condemning ABC’s “checkbook journalism”. But ABC’s Cuomo defended the “checkbook journalism” by stating, “I wish money was not in the game. But you now, it’s going to go somewhere else. You know someone else is going to pay for the same things”. And moreover, Julie Moos, who oversees the Poynter Institute’s website said that “the ‘state of play’ defense argues that it’s justifiable to pay source because the competition is paing them. By that logic, competitive advantage trumps ethics.”

It seems that journalistic ethics are giving way to profitable stories by “checkbook journalism”. Any thoughts or comments on the market mechanism and journalistic ethics?

Investigative Journalism Questioned

2011-06-17T09:34:00.000Z

Investigative journalism is an extremely useful vehicle for which corrupt and unethical practices can be brought to the attention of the outside world. It is a powerful way of showing what is actually happening in the world, away from the images that are shown publicly. The power that investigative journalism has will diminish if the public no longer trusts the sometimes unbelievably shocking information that they are shown.

This is why the ruling by the Editorial Standards Committee (ESC) on a Panorama documentary investigating Primark’s claims that it can deliver cheap, fast fashion without breaking ethical guidelines is worrying. The ESC found that in one scene in the documentary, ‘it was more likely than not that the footage was not genuine.’ The scene in question was of a Bengaluru workshop showing three boys allegedly testing the stitching on Primark garments. The ESC noted six indications that this footage may not be genuine. These included that no garments other than the three being worked on in the film can be seen; that the large needles used in the workshop were unsuitable for "delicate and intricate stitching of the Primark sequined tops"; and inconsistencies in "some evidence including emails". Panorama has been told that they will have to apologize for this footage.

The reliability of investigative journalism is integral to the power that it has. If non-genuine footage is used then the whole piece loses any of its worth. As soon as one thing is questioned, then everything else may be questioned. It is extremely important that only genuine information is provided by investigative journalism as it is the unflinching truth-telling nature of this journalism that makes it one of the most useful tools in exposing things that are not how people say they are. One of the core principles of any form of journalism needs to be that it speaks the truth.

Source: The Guardian

“Hamsterization” of Journalism

2011-06-15T19:59:00.000Z

The term “hamsterization” means an increasing load of work with the ever growing speed of the digital information exchange. According to the Federal Communications Commission of the U.S. American journalism has fallen prey to this phenomenae “[A]s newsrooms have shrunk, the job of the remaining reporters has changed”. The term stems from Dean Starkman's article "The Hamster Wheel" in the Columbia Journalism Review.

Hamsterized news impact not only the journalists but also the consumers of those news. If individual journalists are now expected to write even more at a given time, which does not necessarily imply the quality of the delivered articles or reports, speedy news production may face ethical questions. In fact, former reporter of the New York Times Zachery Kouwe had to resign as a result of plagiarism in his work. This case is unfortunately not unique.

If our demand for information is partly responsible for the corresponding supply, maybe it is time to reverse our urge for needless overload of news in return for quality reports? Or are the newsrooms sole culprit of the hamsterized media?

Source: Ars Technica

What it's like to be a journalist in Turkey

2011-06-10T13:25:00.000Z

Erol Önderoglu speaks of the problems facing journalists in Turkey. Although, as he implies necessary legal basis for the freedom of press, expression and writing is there, some ‘invisible hand’ directs journalists’ work. In fact, sensitive socio-political issues, as for instance that of minority rights in Turkey, is a taboo for journalists and whoever dares to discuss that in a newspaper or other media is very likely to share the fate of Hrant Dink...

How does media ethics find its way through the labyrinth of invisible social structure?

Source: ProtectionInternational

Journalism that Changed the World: Amnesty International at 50

2011-06-07T09:13:00.000Z

Writing articles about human rights abuses can be a huge frustration. These stories are not easy to write and the effect of them, if any, often does not reach the journalist who wrote the story. Last week, Amnesty International celebrated their 50th anniversary and the story behind how they began should give hope to all of those who believe in the power of journalism to make the world a better place.

One day in 1961, Peter Benenson read an article about two Portuguese students who had been incarcerated for raising a toast to freedom. Benenson, enraged by what he had read, wrote an article entitled The Forgotten Prisoners which was published on the 26th May 1961. The level of responses that he received from readers caused the formation of what we know today as Amnesty International. Amnesty International has since obtained the release of thousands of prisoners of conscience across the world.

This movement, that has helped countless people, was started by a spark and that spark was a newspaper article. The media, when used correctly, is able to inspire ordinary people to do extraordinary things by informing them about what is occurring to people thousands of miles away. By telling their stories in an ethical yet thought-provoking manner, journalists truly can help to improve the world. The way in which the media is able to infiltrate people’s homes means they have such a huge control on the conscience of the general public. Media ethics are fundamental in controlling this power so the truth is portrayed to the public in a sensitive way that does not cause harm to those involved in the story.

Source: Amnesty International

How does Wikileaks effect journalism?

2011-06-05T10:24:00.000Z

The concept of Wikileaks was to make classified information available for the proader public. However, this meant a huge amount of raw data and information. The public obviously does not read all these materials but they tend to read their processed short summaries and reports written by journalists.

Since these documents have high popularity among the public they are subject to fraud and manipulation. How can journalists be sure the documents they receive are reliable? Many of these publications faced denial and in these cases journalists should investigate and make sure what they publish was accurate.

Another issue arising from Wikileaks is the quesiton of protecting the source. Often those who serve as source of information are not aware of the risk they take by giving out data and it is the journalist’s responsibility to ensure that the source is well protected. This could mean not publishing the topic at all or publishing it in a way that there could be several different sources who gave out that paricular information.

So where are all these aspects now when publishing Wikileaks information? Sensationalism is getting over the responsible media. Journalists getting involved with leaks should think about their reputation.

Source: Sam Sole – Don’t confuse Wikileaks with journalism

Envelope Journalism

2011-06-01T09:10:00.000Z

In many countries, the practice of ‘envelope journalism’ is widespread. Envelope journalism is the way in which organisations or governments ensure favourable coverage by handing out envelopes containing some money to journalists at press conferences to ensure positive coverage.

From an ethical perspective, a journalist should always tell the whole truth in a balanced manner without any pressure from external influences. Anything else goes against fundamental journalist ethics as it can lead to skewed information being transmitted to the public. By accepting the gift of money, the journalist tacitly enters into a contract with the money giver that they will give favourable coverage. It is easy for a journalist from a wealthy country to say that this is a deplorable practice and no journalist should partake in this behaviour.

However, this does not paint the whole picture. In many countries, the money that journalists receive for their writing does not cover their basic family living costs. For example, in Cambodia, provincial journalists are paid $5 per story that gets published. The money offered to journalists via these envelopes is the only way that people can make a living from journalism and so is the only way to keep the profession alive in certain areas.

If this is the only way to retain a media that informs the public about what is occurring in a country, even if it may sometimes by skewed in favour of those giving the envelope, is this a better option than having no independent media at all? On the other hand, envelope journalism ensures that the rich are able to receive positive, often biased coverage – is a media that has its agenda decided by the wealthy elite more detrimental to a society?

Source:Phnom Penh Post

Old and new forms of unethical journalism

2011-05-31T16:36:00.000Z

What on-going forms of ethics breach do journalists face? Are there any new types arising with the growing speed and competition for news making?

The most recent edition of the Society of Professional Journalists’ (SPJ) ethics book highlights relevant and on-going forms of journalism ethics’ breach. Along with classic ones as reporting on sex-abuse, and privacy issues the book contains appearing relevant issues as checkbook journalism, which simply means paying the sources. Several news-makers, ABC, NBC, CNN and CBS were denounced by the SPJ for checkbook journalism.

Speaking of confidentiality of sources, former President of the SPJ Fred Brown, said: “...there's this almost sacred right to protect your sources, whereas, you know, that could really get you into trouble” and suggested journalists that “when you think about it, if you tell them what you're after, you're more likely to get their cooperation than if you go into this super-defensive mode”. In other words, its better to lay your cards open rather than deal with possible consequences.

These and many other issues are raised in the book containing 47 case-studies, decisions and questions. Again, as a journalist one can find some familiar issues to him/herself and ways to address them, as well as get acquainted with new ones. In the universe of cases the decision remains that of each journalist...

Source: StinkyJournalism.org

Is it ethical to advertise through social media?

2011-05-28T09:22:00.000Z

What is the aim of social media? Isn’t it to keep people informed about each other? Facebook thinks so. The social networking site recently banned sponsored posts on its site because a new business model appeared where a company paid famous people with a lot of followers to post advertisements on their wall/page. This obviously makes user experience less credible and much more commerical which means a decrease in the quality of the service.

Users often don’t realise that their favourite singer posts a brand because he was paid for it and not because he actually uses their product which is misleading and is against ethical practices. The platform’s main purpose is to connect people and exchange information and the promotions are restricted to the side column areas as a distinct service. This way the trust of users can be preserved and the site can expect a long term future. The same concept is applicable for news outlets as public trust is the most engaging force for the audience to follow a certain news platform for reliable, accurate and ethical information.

Those media companies that let fake or misleading articles to be published and focus on shocking and scandalous news might have some attention from the public but in the long term readers get tired of reading something that obviously cannot be true or which does not present values for them. Quality and ethical journalism will take a rise and its representatives can expect a strong circle of readers and a growing prestige in the media world.

Source: Inside Facebook

Public Interest vs. What the Public Finds Interesting

2011-05-25T09:46:00.000Z

In light of the recent furore surrounding an injunction stopping the press from naming a Premiership footballer involved in an affair with a minor celebrity, it seems important to assess what private information should be publishable due to public interest. Public interest is different to what the public finds interesting.

What the public finds interesting: It is a fact of human nature that people are curious about the lives of others and given the chance will happily take an interest in the lives of people completely disconnected to their own. A tad ironically, this was the basis of Big Brother the program through which Imogen Thomas (the minor celebrity in question) first entered the public consciousness. Gossip magazines charting famous people’s everyday lives are a huge business now which shows that the general public is interested in seemingly private details about these people. However, this does not mean that these matters are of public interest.

Public Interest: According to the Press Complaints Commission (the self-regulatory body that deals with complaints about the editorial content of newspapers and magazines), public interest ‘includes but is not confined to: i)Detecting or exposing crime or serious impropriety ; ii) Protecting public health and safety; iii) Preventing the public from being misled by an action or statement by an individual.’ It is arguable whether the name of a footballer who had an affair with a C-list celebrity falls under any of these categories. A footballer does not base his reputation on his moral virtue; it is based on him being good at playing football. The public has not been misled by his actions into believing something that is untrue. When politicians are involved in similar exposés, this becomes more confusing as these people have been elected by the public partly due to their reputations. As was seen during the early 1990’s in the UK, when politicians base these reputations on being moral and clean cut, it is of public interest when their lives are not conducted in this way and details can be published so that the public is not misled. Practice what you preach appears to be the mantra that politicians should follow.

The conflict between the right to privacy and the right to freedom of speech has been intensely debated during the last few months. This distinction between what interests the public and what is of public interest is an extremely important aspect of this debate.

Source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/

What is the future of media?

2011-05-24T16:30:00.000Z

We have seen how social media networks are contributing to the acceleration of the information exchange. However, they do more than the delivery of news. Recent political developments and the wave of uprisings in the Middle East have made social media networks to information providers, where conventional news makers such as TV, newspapers and radio had limited access to the rapid developments on the ground.

With “the New Age of Journalism” the editing function of the conventional media may also need modifications. Is a junction between the social and conventional media networks in delivering news possible?

Source: Al Jazeera

"French journalists' unspoken rule"

2011-05-18T14:51:00.000Z

Today's media is full of news about the scandal around the French presidential candidate, Mr. Strauss-Kahn. The event generated discomfort in the French society because the American press treated the issue in a different way from French journalism practises. In France journalists have an unspoken rule to protect the private life of politicians, especially in higher levels of the hierarchy. Photos taken of Mr. Strauss-Kahn while being arrested are considered disrespectful as French people see private life as truly one's own business.

Now one could ask whether the way of handling the scandal from the media's side was ethical or not? Protecting one's privacy is a significant element to consider when reporting, however the public would expect from one of its leaders to show good example since his acts determine his personality and as a leader it is important for the people to trust a good person. Media ethics are obviously regarded different in different parts of the world and what is unethical in one country; it might be still common or acceptable in another.

Source: The New York Times

Philippines: women advance journalism

2011-05-17T10:41:00.000Z

The atmosphere of supression and censorship, where surveillance and interrogation of journalists was not excluded from government methods of fighting against any critique in its address female journalists have led the battle against the dictatorship of Ferdinand Marcos in Philippines. The result – the authoritarian regime toppled and women outnumber men in media networks today.

Inday Espina-Verona, a journalist of the country’s leading broadcasting network, says: “You cannot explain the rise of the women journalists without talking about martial law. When the men were struggling back into journalism, the women were already there.”

The reaction of the women journalists for more censorship and harsh consequences for their personal security was even “more critical pieces about the government”. The executive director of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility Melinda de Jesus says “editorial competence and independece” are their priority, whereas quality journalism – their aim.

Source: The New York Times/International Herald Tribune