[ POLL ] Principles of Journalism.

Post Reply New Topic

Principles of Journalism

As I understand the subject, the cardinal principles which underpin ethical journalism work are well-established and instantly recognizable to media staff around the world as a shared and common basis for editorial work. These fundamental values are:

• Accuracy & Fact-Based Communications: Journalists cannot always guarantee 'truth', but getting the facts right is the cardinal principle of journalism. Journalists should always strive for accuracy, give all the relevant facts and ensure that they have been checked. Journalists should avoid malicious lies, fake news and unverified information.

• Independence: Journalists must be independent voices; they should not act, formally or informally, on behalf of special interests whether political, corporate or cultural. They should declare to their editors -- or directly to the audience -- any relevant information about political affiliations, financial arrangements or other personal connections that might constitute a conflict of interest. They should act according to their own consciences. They should not peddle racist or sexist propaganda or be a voice-box for religious, political, or other vested interests.

• Fairness & Impartiality: Most stories have at least two sides. While there is no obligation to present every side in every piece, the stories produced by journalists should strive for balance and provide context. Objectivity is not always possible, and may not always be desirable (in the face, for example, of clear and undeniable brutality or inhumanity), but impartial reporting builds trust and confidence. They should tell all sides of a story. In particular, they should give voice to the victims and survivors of traumatic events as well as reflect the legitimate concerns of the people around them.

• Humanity: Journalists should do no harm. They should show sensitivity and care in their work recognizing that what they publish or broadcast may be hurtful. It is not possible to report freely and in the public interest without occasionally causing hurt and offence, but journalists should always be aware of the impact of words and images on the lives of others. This is particularly important when reporting on minorities, children, the victims of violence, and vulnerable people. Journalism should also point towards solutions to the physical, emotional and crisis that victims endure.

• Accountability & Transparency: A key principle of responsible journalism is the ability to be accountable. Journalists should be responsible for their work, correct errors and always disclose who they are and be open in their methods except in the most extraordinary of circumstances. When they make mistakes they must correct them and expressions of regret must be sincere. They listen to their audience and provide remedies to those dealt with unfairly.

Although these ethics are generally well-understood inside journalism, to be useful they have to be applied in the real world of on-the-spot reporting as well.

•••

The poll asks if you agree or disagree (and why) with what I've stated above. You may select only one option, but you may change your selection at any time.

Please do not turn this into another "Left" versus "Right" thread, a discussion of current or historical events, or a discussion of your personal problems -- please stay on-topic.

Thank you,

Fnord

I believe the ideals set forth in journalistic ethical standards are something to shoot for—but ultimately utopian.

Yes, I believe in them totally. But, like total egalitarianism, these standards are unattainable in toto.

There is no ethics in journalism,they will do anything to get a story,and manipulate the facts to fit there opinions.

Evidence, please?  Just because...

... someone publishes facts that you want kept hidden, that does not mean that they are unethical.

... someone publishes facts that you refuse to accept, that does not make them the unethical people.

... the facts implicate your heroes in some scandal or illegal activity does not make journalists unethical.

... the facts provide exoneration for someone you hate does not make journalists unethical, either.

... the facts already fit the journalists' opinions does not make those journalists unethical.

... the facts and opinions provided by journalist make you feel uncomfortable does not make journalists unethical.

Maybe if you did your own journalistic investigations -- something more in-depth than skimming through tabloids and Twitter feeds -- you too might find your own ethics questioned for reporting the facts.

Never realized such perceptions about journalists were in despute.How many people think otherwise about the journalism profession.

Your perception is common among the illiterate, but rare among the educated (the folks who actually consume most news media). Have studied journalism and know first hand that it involves a lot of studying ethics and law.

You forgot:
... neglects\hides\ignores facts which disprove assertions made in story, making them unethical.

... selectively editing\excerpting sections of footage\quotes to support a narrative, making them unethical.

... failing to issue retractions\prominent corrections when found to be incorrect, making them unethical.

... Not publishing\reporting on a person\event in order to "protect" that person\group, making them unethical.

Unfortunately, most "news" seems to have descended into "opinion" rather than news, with "reporters", "presenters" and "editors" adding their opinions\beliefs into stories to "sway" peoples opinions, rather than simply reporting the facts and allowing the reader\listener\viewer to make their own minds up.

Most educated people think the media to to far right or to far left depending on there persuasion.Liberals call the media right wing and fascist and conservatives(save maybe Fox) call the media biased as left wing.Almost all black people agree the media portrays minorities negatively.

Where are these fictional educated people who think the media is centrist and unbiased?

#1 principal is to make money

So, the journalism should fit the readership.

Keep track of your own point please. You said most people think that media has no ethics and makes stuff up.

I said that educated folks dont think that.

Being biased is not the same thing as "having no ethics and making stuff up".

And if opposing groups in society BOTH think that the media is biased against them- then thats evidence that the media is being fair. you're arguing against yourself.

News outlets tend to be biased, but biased in different ways. So its good to consume more than one outlet.
In the good old days a few years ago I used to be able to get both RT and Al Jazeera. So I could combine my diet of US based News with two anti american outlets. Though both Jazeera and RT are supposed to be anti american they markedly disagree with each other as much as they both do with US news. Interesting buffet of povs back then.

When and where did I ever say the news media made stuff up,I never said that!

They take real news and bend it slightly to serve the agenda of the person or persons who own a particular news agency.If you want to work for FOX you better make the right look good and the left bad,if you work for CBS evening news,the opposite.

Journalism is dead.

FOX has no truth and CNN has no news LOL

god bless the 4th estate, the fifth estate has issues.

As far as I’m concerned, nobody has ethics anymore.

The downfall, in my not-so-humble opinion, especially in broadcast journalism, is when the Reagan administration, got rid of the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which came about because of WGCB Radio in Red Lion, PA. (I lived about 1 mile from their studios and transmitter farm when I was a child. My next door neighbor was their chief engineer at the time.). WGCB was a religious station at the time, and broadcast every hellfire and brimstone Pastor that would pay for the station’s time. Ditto with WGCB-TV and WINB Shortwave Radio. The Fairness Doctrine stated that broadcast stations had to give equal time to any and all opposing viewpoints.

Ever since the Fairness Doctrine was abolished, as well as the “liberalization” of granting broadcast licenses, which ended up with marginal stations going dark, or being bought up by chains like Cumulus Media, TEGNA, Hearst, Sinclair, Nexstar, etc., local broadcast outlets Now have to toe the line of their corporate masters. THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS INDEPENENT JOURNALISM ANYMORE! IF YOUR REPORTERS AND EDITORS NOT CONTRIBUTING TO THE COMPANY’S BOTTOM LINE, CONSIDER YOURSELF OUT OF A JOB!

Sadly, the print media suffers from the same problem.

Nowadays, the Song “Dirty Laundry” from a few decades ago, is the prevailing attitude.

It’s why I no longer watch or listen to broadcast news, except for the weather. I also don’t read newspapers anymore because the reporting has been so dumbed-down as to be useless.

I asked you people to not turn this thread into a discussion of your personal problems.  Your cynicism is a personal problem -- YOUR personal problem.  If I have to ask the moderators to lock this thread too, then i will do it.

The poll asks if you agree or disagree (and why) with the ethics definitions as stated in the first post -- not whether or not you believe which news sources are ethical or whether or not the journalists themselves are ethical, so please stay on topic.