Journalists can succumb to guilty arrangements with their morals: a willingness to please, or not to displease, a radical desire to prove at all costs. There can be many bad reasons for this and they regularly threaten journalists’ ethics if they are not careful. Unfortunately, these are not the only threats to their profession. There are also all kinds of external pressure, which come from industrial and financial lobbies, political powers or the owners of press organs. The risks of conflict within the editorial staff can consequently be frequent and numerous.
As Paola Boivin, a former journalist from the Republic of Arizona and now a professor of journalism and mass communication, said, ethics in journalism is more important than ever because of the assault of governments on the media in today’s society. Ethical means integrity, staying true to one’s values and not changing one’s way of thinking because society has told you to. According to the code of the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), ethical standards consist of seeking the truth and reporting it accurately and fairly, minimising harm by treating everyone as a human being who deserves respect, acting independently to serve the public, and being accountable and transparent in taking responsibility for one’s work.
While journalists must, as a matter of priority, inform the public on the current affairs, if this is done without ethical reflection, the risk is that readers’ trust would be lost and the reputation of the profession as a whole would be damaged.
Blair, a journalist who had lied for years, not only offended the newspapers where he used to work, the New York Times, his colleagues, friends and mentor, but also brings the credibility of the entire profession into major disrepute.
If trust has been lost, it will be damaged all the harder and longer the journalist’s lies have lasted. It is possible to forgive a mistake, but it is much harder to forgive a succession of lies. This is precisely what happened in Blair’s story. Thus, even though he encountered several problems as a black reporter surrounded by white journalists, followed by addiction and depression, the frequency and length of lies undoubtedly swept away his credibility, leaving behind a feeling of betrayal.
In 1997, an American survey showed that 74% of Britons would trust newsreaders, compared to 44% in America, but 15% of Britons trust journalists, compared to 43% of Americans. These statistics suggest that people believe more in the press than in the journalists themselves. Another study by the British Medical Association indicates that in 2000, the population would trust more of a street random citizen (52%) than a journalist (15%). People would rather accept a mistake by anyone than from a journalist.
According to Richard Sambrook in 2004, a director of BBC news: “In journalism, being ‘mainly right’ is like being half pregnant, it is an unsustainable condition”. A statement that has obviously been contested, but which also shows that it is not enough to be half right. “Journalists’ failures are important because journalism is important.” According to Harcup.
We have a tendency to neglect that, newspapers are making revenue not only through readership but also through advertisement. In order to make profit, journalists have to create a constant interest for their newspaper from the readers, to make them read and see the advertising, which means more income from companies. Nowadays, a few make the decision not to place advertisements in their newspaper, but the competition is tough and the commercial pressure makes the newspapers concur with this.
Journalists ought to have an intimate relationship with the truth. This is why we need independent media, which, sadly, is far from being the case : Le Monde Diplomatique published the press properties in France. It shows very clearly that all the French media, with one or two minor exceptions, are owned by about thirty groups of large family fortunes, nearly all of whom have numerous economic, industrial or financial interests.
However, journalists are not as powerful as we might think, most of them have to deal with unpleasant working conditions and it has nothing to do with their notoriety. It is being this way considering they have to make profit by reaching an high audience and enormous revenue with costs as little as possible. Unfortunately, they do not have these significant expectations for themselves, these demands come from the editors, owners and shareholders.
There is consequently a market pressure partly from the investors who could move out at any time to another media outlet. That is also why most of the media tend towards “buzz stories” rather than investigative journalism anymore, presumably because this sort of stories is not what it sells. It is particularly the case with TV programs and not just news, which is why we have plenty of “attractive” programs instead of cultural ones. Although the market competition is troublesome and journalists are under content pressure, breaking the rules is absolutely not acceptable and we should not accept any excuses for the non-respect of their duty, which is being ethical and telling the truth.
People First News 