There can be no reflection on the press ethics without raising the question of finding a balance between press freedom and its regulation. Press freedom is one of the main public freedoms amongst freedom of speech and religion. It is guaranteed by international treaties and by fundamental legal texts in most democratic countries. It is a necessary condition for the exercise of democracy. It is part of the freedom of speech and criticism enjoyed by all citizens living in democratic countries. It is, however, a conditional freedom.
In our democratic regimes, press freedom remains a major issue which is still confronted with several constraints. Economic logic may run counter to the freedom to publish.
Today in our Western societies, media concentration is a strong trend that is increasing day by day. The major communication groups, often in the hands of industrial and financial interests, are seeking to strengthen themselves by buying up more and more newspapers, radios and televisions. In this context, information itself becomes an economic data whose value is most often measured by its audience level, at the risk of censoring or preventing the development of pluralist or more relevant information but which would not necessarily be more profitable.
The respect of privacy and the legal framework resulting from it also constitutes a constraint and a limit to press freedom (Auvret, 1999).
Moreover, the more influence the media have, the greater their responsibilities are. The media, especially those media that use images either through television or online, have an unparalleled impact on the population. The power of the image, the emotion it creates, can lead to a preference for the spectacular over the mission of information. This situation is not without questioning the contradictory orders for information content which journalists must try to respond to at the risk of losing all credibility and professional ethics; and all this in a context of a crisis of confidence in the press on the part of readers.
Nor should we neglect the public’s appetite, real or aroused, for information in the form of entertainment. Even this lighter kind of information sometimes has its usefulness; widespread confusion seems to have become the norm. There is a growing need to better redefine the boundaries between what is entertainment and what is information, worthy of genuine interest and properly verified. The credibility of the press inevitably depends on a demand for quality in the information it disseminates.
The British Royal family has been on every spotlights by the British press because of the public interest andthe reactions. From a reader’s point of view, the offenders are mostly the journalists who publish this kind of information which can clearly represent an infringement on private life. But it is the duty of the readers to be aware that these stories are not acceptable and then, that they should not read them. “We condemn the messengers while devouring the message.” Which is why there is an issue between the right of access to information and right to privacy. This right to privacy has evolved and is different between cultures and era and it is sometimes complicated to judge the borderlines, but it is being an ethical journalist to know at any time or anywhere, where the limits are.
People First News 