Media transparency debate: Two views of transparency in journalism. From the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists archives.
Media transparency debate: Two views of transparency in journalism. From the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists archives.
Kobe coverage chaotic: The rush to get news first forced errors, reports Margaret Sullivan.
“In any major breaking news event, whether a hurricane or a school shooting, you can assume that some of the early coverage will be wrong,” she writes. “The Kobe Bryant story was an especially bad example of that truism.”
Canada media and royals clash: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle warn media about privacy, writes Darcy Schild.
It’s “new territory” for Canadian media and privacy laws, which are “relatively undefined.”
NPR seeks public editor: Unusual job opportunity if “this sounds like you.”
Diplomatic style that engenders respect and trust required, says the ad. Must stay current on media ethics and trends. Digital and social media proficiency and sophistication needed. Salary not specified.
NYT seeks ethical Op-Eds: After an Op-Ed stumble, top editors assign the standards editor to advise the Opinion department.
“While our news and opinion journalists will continue to have separate, distinct missions, their work is rooted in common standards for accuracy, fairness and integrity,” they say.
Chasing foundation grants: Jacob Nelson and Patrick Ferrucci report that foundation funding often goes to news nonprofits for technology-driven projects, audience-engagement projects and for pushing journalists to expand their work beyond traditional routines.
Decade of media ethics: Sydney Smith gives an overview of major issues and trends from 2010-2019.
The term “fake news” rises in political reporting. Hoaxes, lawsuits, retractions and firings crop up in covering the president.
The last half of the decade saw an apparent decrease in plagiarism and fabrication cases.
Visual misinformation: The unsung heroes of the internet who develop standards for structured data are turning their attention to visual misinformation, writes Joshua Benton.
Applying deepfakes and cheapfakes to videos.
News on stage: Catherine Adams writes: “One of the best ways journalism can address its well-documented crisis in credibility is to meet its readers face-to-face.”
Newsrooms across the world are experimenting with “live news” formats and filling theaters.
By Casey Bukro
Codes of ethics sound like such noble things.
They can be inspirational and aspirational, statements of our highest moral and professional conduct.
Like any description of what is good, the devil is in the details. And where journalists are involved, the effort can bring out the devil in them. Some seem to handle it better than others.
For instance, three journalism groups are considering revising or creating codes of ethics: The Society of Professional Journalists, the Radio Television Digital News Association and the Online News Association.
The SPJ effort stands out because of the degree of conflict that erupted over charges by one of SPJ’s regional directors, Michael Koretzky, that the organization’s national ethics committee has conducted the code revision process largely in secrecy. Koretzky is a member of SPJ’s national board.
“It’s been difficult to get answers,” Koretzky said in an e-mail to SPJ leaders. Koretzky launched his attack against the national ethics committee by e-mailing his “journoterrorist” blog illustrated with 11 panels that graphically compares SPJ’s code revision efforts with ONA’s.
Kevin Smith, SPJ’s national ethics committee chair, denied “this conspiracy theory of secrecy in revising the code,” adding “we have nothing to hide.”
Koretzky replied that he never said anything about a conspiracy, but “the fact remains that no one has explained to the SPJ board (or anyone else) how the first draft of the code revision was compiled” and who was involved.
David Cuillier, SPJ’s president, added this to the chain of e-mails: “You’re absolutely right, Michael, that we have not communicated the process, or engaged members and non-members, as effectively as ONA.” No conspiracy or secrecy, he added, “but the ultimate outcome is a much more low-key effort on our part. All true.”
SPJ adopted its present code in 1996.
The American Journalism Review described the struggles over SPJ’s proposed code revision.
The Online News Association is working on a novel approach, which it calls “Build Your Own Ethics Code,” a crowdsourced ethics code.
ONA describes it as a toolkit “to help news outlets, bloggers and journalists decide on ethical guidelines that match their own ideas about reporting and journalism.”
The ethics guide would be a constantly updated online document. Reporters will be encouraged to publish the ethics codes they create, and to hold themselves and their news outlets accountable to them, said ONA. In other words, it would be largely voluntary.
RTDNA’s ethics code was last updated in 2000, “and I don’t need to tell you how greatly our technology and our newsrooms have changed in 14 years!” said Mike Cavender, RTDNA”s executive director.
One of the central questions in revising or creating codes of ethics is whether they should reflect changing technology, or state undying principles that apply regardless of technological changes.
RTDNA asked its members to complete a survey. “The goal is to insure that a new code fits our business as it stands today, without straying from the principles that define outstanding journalism.”
All three code-writing efforts are in the round one stage, with more rounds to follow. SPJ’s national ethics committee is expected to report its findings at the organization’s annual convention in September.
All three are worth watching to see if they end in a win, or in a knockout.