Media ethics: EJC interview with ‘Stinkyjournalism.org’

US media ethics website Stinkyjournalism.org has been following the development of the code of ethics put together by EJC right from the start.

Below is the full Q&A with EJC editor Howard Hudson, which fed their report entitled: ‘European Journalism Centre’s Ethics Code to Include Bloggers, All of Europe’.

Will the code still be not enforceable, but rather as a guide for journalists (and bloggers)?

HH: The code is not designed to be enforced top-down. It’s created by journalists for journalists and remains a guide for training and editorial decision-making. We’ve now produced a joint code with two axes: one linking old and new media, and the other linking journalists in Britain, France, Germany, Italy or Spain. This should bring more clarity on how to work ethically and provide a larger solidarity network. In time, it could evolve into something more, encompassing formal protections at European level—but that depends on political will and if enough journalists and bloggers want to sign up. I go into this in more detail below.
 
In incorporating more European countries, what struggles have you and the other creators of the code encountered? Any inconsistencies in journalism ethics standards (not just governmental censorship) cross-countries?

HH: It’s more that some codes present elements not seen elsewhere, for example in the code of conduct of the International Federation of Journalists. In Italy, one priority is not to identify police and legal teams working on mafia trials. As organised crime is a global phenomenon, that principle could be vital elsewhere. In Germany, one aspect is not to report medical research in a sensationalist way, as it may give false hope to vulnerable readers. Again, I think that could be relevant to other countries. In Spain, journalists are asked to defend ‘free access to public archives and administrative registers’. This needs clarification, so we would welcome a case study from a Spanish journalist.
 
Have you and the EJC had any support from outside organizations/journalists in creating the code?

HH: We should thank the University of Tampere in Finland, which produced the English translations of the various codes and which hosts the EthicNet website.
I’ve also heard from individual journalists. One in Brussels said we are ‘on to a great thing’ but that his main priority is to stay afloat. One in London questioned whether the market was ‘too open for a set code’ (for us, this is a major reason for the code: to cover and bring together journalists and bloggers from different backgrounds). But he agreed that changes in the industry are blurring the formal lines of journalism, and that some bloggers can ‘justifiably be considered part of the journalistic firmament’.
 
The IFJ has also produced several texts, including those listed on the Ethical Journalism Initiative website. These are all helpful, but our code adds value because: i) it’s a single reference point for busy journalists and aspiring bloggers; ii) it’s produced in a collaborative, bottom-up fashion; iii) it aims to reconcile old and new media; iv) it bridges gaps between journalism codes in five EU countries (with an open door for more); v) its ultimate goal is to secure protections and privileges at EU level for ‘ethical’ journalists and bloggers. This is already the case in Canada—so long as they can prove due diligence. I believe these protections would be easier to claim if there were a single agreed reference point, to which journalists or bloggers could appeal.
 
Any update on timeline for code’s implementation?

HH: It’s based on existing codes, so it can already be used by journalists, editors and bloggers in Britain, France, Germany, Italy and Spain. We think it should be extended to include other national codes – particularly in Eastern Europe. It should also be updated, perhaps every five years, to reflect changes in the media landscape.

Also I think it’s important to work on something concrete – not just another code of ethics but something that covers journalists and bloggers working in different countries, and which could lead to greater protections for all of us. The alternative is to carry on going round in circles: insulting each other, having ‘spirited debates’, but ultimately arriving at ‘no firm conclusions’.
 
I read the Parliament’s resolution. Is it enforceable? Can they require a code to be established if you - or some other organization - doesn’t?

HH: The resolution is a large text about journalism and new media in Europe, of which ethics is just one aspect. By now it should have been sent to the EU Council and Commission. This will be a long process, which may even lose the ethical perspective unless a media organisation adds focus and impetus. To see how we can take this forward, I’m now in touch with the ‘Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe’, the European Parliament group of the resolution’s author Morten Løkkegaard.

One further option would be to link our code of ethics to wider press freedom goals (which I argue for in this article). We could lobby governments to make the ‘European Charter on Press Freedom’ legally binding in exchange for journalists and bloggers committing to a ‘European Code of Media Coverage Ethics’.

Is this going too far? I don’t think so, but I would welcome the opinions of media legal experts. Should there be a quid pro quo? Why not? I think we can have it both ways if we if seek formal, international protections in return for adhering to a code of ethics. Right now, it’s the ‘media predators’ – in Italy for instance – who have it both ways. That’s bad for journalists and for wider society.

Still, the code should never be a straightjacket for journalists, rather a guide or back-up in case of legal challenges. The last thing I want is to encourage self-censorship. Nor do I want to undermine the profession. I agree with Jeff Jarvis, in his preface to the book Supermedia: Saving Journalism So It Can Save the World: “No one says that amateurs will or should replace professional journalists… Professional and amateur, journalist and citizen may now work together to gather and share more news in more ways to more people than was ever possible before… We can do more together than we can apart.”

Right now there is political will in the EU for both stronger press freedom protections and a code of ethics for new media, so now’s the time to push for this. Self-regulation seems better than talking in circles or facing the prospect of regulation from above with nothing in return.

Posted on November 3, 2010 by .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address).
Filed under news.