Editorial
The quest for sound ethical journalism
When Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi addressed the ninth annual conference of the Tumas Fenech Foundation for Education in Journalism a few weeks ago he encouraged both new and seasoned journalists to pursue the truth rather than sensationalism and to focus on news rather than personalities. He also stressed the need for ethical journalism.
On Thursday, the Institute of Maltese Journalists (IĠM) announced that Kevin Aquilina, a lawyer by professional and a former CEO of the Malta Broadcasting Authority (MBA), has been appointed chairman of the Press Ethics Commission (PEC), succeeding Chief Justice Emeritus Giuseppe Mifsud Bonnici.
The IĠM also announced that the PEC would be recommending changes to the institute's code of ethics. Perhaps it should also study the possibility of finding a way of having one single code of ethics for all journalists in Malta. The MBA has its own as also do a number of media houses.
Dr Aquilina, his PEC, the IĠM and indeed every single journalist worth his/her salt will certainly agree with Dr Gonzi that ethical journalism is a must.
Malta needs good journalists if the country is to make further developments in mature political analyses and judgment. But, as the Prime Minister contended, there are structural determinants that come into play in ensuring good journalism. It is not just important to provide training for every individual who desires to take journalism in a spirit of service to society. For good journalism to happen, Malta needs the institutional environment that supports such a profession.
Journalists are mainly there to ensure society is equipped with that sort of knowledge that allows it to make informed decisions. They also serve to keep the Executive on their toes. Propaganda is not part of their role and neither should they be promoting exclusion or disrespect.
Alas, the involvement of the political parties in the media, including, unfortunately, their hold on the MBA, means they have the means to depict the world as a simultaneous oxymoronic co-existence of heaven and hell. Worse still, some of the so-called journalists they employ become participatory in such antics. The end result is that the public is not being served with news that allows for respect of individual citizens and consent building.
In the case of broadcasting, the Constitution demands balance and impartiality. When this clause was inserted, it obviously referred to the state broadcasting system that existed then, which was the only medium on the airwaves. With the introduction of broadcasting pluralism, the MBA interpreted this mandate in a collective fashion. One would be able to get a cumulative balanced view of the local situation if one were to attend to all the news bulletins of the different news sources. Such a decision, besides going against professional journalistic work, made sure that the media be itself a victim and, furthermore, reinforces the local tendency at polarising everyone and everything.
At a time when the public is being inundated with all kinds of messages, the issue of credibility becomes ever more essential. For political parties, the credibility issue is even more critical because they know that only influencing the undecided voter, ultimately carry the sway.
And a crucial ingredient that ensures credibility is sound ethical behaviour, which is what Dr Gonzi seems to be after and what the PEC under Dr Aquilina will surely pursue vigorously.
2 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
J Martinelli
Apr 18th 2009, 14:44
Opinions of issues looked upon from different angles nearly always give the impression that some are saying the truth and others misinterpreting facts at best.
This state of affairs is evidenced by the political papers published by the two main political parties and the GWU and the television stations NET and One TV. The Editor however forgot to mention that among many mortals there are quite a few with brains, thus able to sift facts from fantasies. One hardly expects the PN to pat the LP's back and vice-versa. When one side attacks, the other side defends.
Open criticism is acceptable and forms part of democracy in action, however, it never justifies misrepresentation and lies. And herein come 'ethics'.
In my mind 'ethics' mean the reporting of news without embellishing angles which may slant the very essence of news. Unfortunately journalists are often culpable of 'manufacturing' news rather than duly reporting them.
'Independent' papers have a tough job because readers often express their biased opinions in them and the respective editors have to decide what is proper and what is not, but in the end, it is not their place to curtail one's opinion because it may upset others.
MSciberras
Apr 18th 2009, 12:24
UNBELIEVABLE. You would think that with todays headlines the editorial would be on .....well! And while on the subject, how about an informed independent analysis on which legal interpretation re the tranfer of illegal immigrants is corrrect when it comes to the issue of closest port vs responsibility of SAR.. I consider myself just a little bit more knowledgeable than most about the subject and am still lost here, having concurred with the Maltese view that illegal immigrants are transferred to the closest port regardless of who is responsible for the SAR. I can however understand the Italian viewpoint, much as I disagree with it, that Maltas size relative to the size of her SAR means that in practice Malta is very often not the nearest port.. Is there an atgument ofr reducing the size of the SAR and foregoing the economic benefits? Who knows?
Please choose the reason of your report below: