EYE ON ETHICS

by the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility

COMMISSION on Human Rights Chair Leila de Lima has rightly reminded the media that Andal Ampatuan Jr., no matter how strong the evidence against him may be, still has rights, among them the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty. The clan that spawned him may not have accorded others the same respect, but he and his kin are nevertheless entitled to the rights, among them the right to life and to lives free from fear, they may have denied them.

Media people, some of them members of the National Press Club, waved photographs of the victims of the November 23 Maguindanao massacre in Ampatuan’s face, perhaps in the vain hope of seeing some indication of remorse from the stone faced warlord. But at least one photojournalist managed to hit him with his camera, in the process adding physical assault to the legitimate expression of media outrage.

One would hope that the camera emerged in better condition than Ampatuan, who is said to have suffered a concussion as result. But the media workers’ and journalists’ outrage was understandable. The killing of their colleagues last November 23 was not only the worst in the entire history of the mass media, it was also done with a brutality so exceptional that it defied understanding.

The ethics of journalism however, does support Chairperson de Lima’s reminder. Not only is the presumption of innocence among the principles journalists are expected to honor. They’re also expected to limit their outrage to the words that constitute the sword and shield of media practice, even as the admonition not to cause harm includes not only the imperative of minimizing harm, but a prohibition as well against physically attacking those one does not agree with.

Journalist outrage and energies are better directed towards rigorous examination of the factors that made the massacre inevitable. These factors include the system of political alliances and the institutionalization of electoral fraud that have made the coddling of warlords a continuing problem, in addition to the corruption that has doomed the areas of warlord rule to perpetual and worsening poverty. Providing the information and analysis the public needs to put the November 23 massacre in context so it may use its sovereign power to prevent future ones is a responsibility that rightly belongs to the media. It may cause harm, but only in terms of the exposure that information makes possible, rather than the physical harm that attacking anyone with a camera or any other handy piece of equipment inflicts.

This article was first published in the September-October 2009 issue of the PJR Reports.

Mr. Basorie teaches journalism at the Dr. Soetomo Press Institute (Lembaga Pers Dr. Soetomo, LPDS) in Jakarta, Indonesia.
____________________________________________________________________

(The media situation in the other countries of Southeast Asia is no less complex than that in the Philippines, as the following account of a free expression case in Indonesia reveals.)

It took the mother of two under-fives to unintentionally raise a public debate on the threat to freedom of expression by a new electronic information law. Prita Mulyasari, 32, had landed in the Tangerang Women’s Correctional Facility for e-mailing a complaint to friends on Aug. 15, 2008 about the hospital service she had received. The private e-mail got into numerous mailing lists. It reached the hospital concerned and the hospital sued her for libel.

The Omni International Alam Sutra Hospital in Tangerang, Banten province, a two-hour drive West from Jakarta, filed the complaint. The police compiled a dossier. The Tangerang prosecutor’s office, using the Criminal Code and the 2008 Electronic Information and Transactions (ITE) Act, indicted her. The Tangerang District Court found her guilty in a civil case last May 11. Officers from the prosecutor’s office picked her up at home and brought her to prison last May 13.

More »

The author is a journalist based in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

_______________________________________________________________________

The Malaysian government’s deafening silence and non-action in a recent issue involving a story on religion only reinforces public perception that it isn’t really interested in social unity and peace.

THREE YEARS ago, the Malaysian government suspended a 61-year-old English daily over a cartoon.

The Sarawak Tribune eventually closed down after drawing flak from the government when it published the Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons to illustrate a story on the topic “Cartoon No Big Impact Here” on Feb. 4, 2006.

So strict is the Malaysian government that it would not let anything and anyone incite racial or religious sentiments that could make certain segments of society angry, or worse, trigger riots in this racially and religiously diverse society. In fact, the Sedition Act makes it a crime.

However, the government is now keeping quiet over an article by Al Islam, a magazine that focuses on the Muslim faith. In its May issue, the magazine ran an article on claims that the Catholic Church was converting young Muslims to Christianity.

More »

News service Reuters made their Reuters Handbook of Journalism available online.

The handbook includes sections on Standards and Values; a Guide to Operations; a Sports Style Guide; a General Style Guide; and a Specialized Guide.

According to Reuters, they made the handbook public for reasons of transparency, service, and geography.

For more information on the contents of the handbook, please visit this blog post: For the Record (Dean Wright on Ethics, Innovation and Values).

Dean Wright is Global Editor, Ethics, Innovation and News Standards. Any opinions are his own.

A is for abattoir; Z is for ZULU: All in the Handbook of Journalism

The first entry is abattoir (not abbatoir); the last is ZULU (a term used by Western military forces to mean GMT)….

The handbook is the guidance Reuters journalists live by — and we’re proud of it. Until now, it hasn’t been freely available to the public. In the early 1990s, a printed handbook was published and in 2006 the Reuters Foundation published a relatively short PDF online that gave some basic guidance to reporters. But it’s only now that we’re putting the full handbook online….

A “right of reply” bill has been approved by the Philippine House of Representatives; a less repressive version is pending in the Philippine Senate. Nearly all Philippine media groups, including the major broadsheets and broadcast networks, are opposed to it.
_____________________________________________________________________

No one among those opposed to the Right of Reply bill on principle will argue that shoddy reporting doesn’t exist. There have been too many instances (in some cases involving media practitioners themselves who’re attacked by other practitioners) in which the right of reply, which responsible journalists must honor, is denied those who have been maligned in the media either through bad reporting, malicious comment, or both.

The right of reply is among the ethical principles reporters and other media practitioners, especially editors, should recognize and honor by, first of all, getting the facts right through multiple sourcing. Journalism is a discipline of verification, its very justification being accuracy first of all, which also demands fairness (presenting both or all sides) as well as balance (providing all sides in any question equal space in the case of print and equal time in the case of electronic media). Operationally, news stories try to achieve this by reporting the denial by someone accused of wrongdoing as well as the accusation. Opinion writers also need to at least provide the other side of the argument.

More »

Statement of the Center for Media Freedom and Responsibility (CMFR) on the Right of Reply Bills
_________________________________________________________________

Senator Aquilino Pimentel Jr.’s sponsorship of the Senate version of the Right of Reply bill has moved some media colleagues to assume absence of malice in its intentions, although they don’t seem to have given Rep. Monico Puentevella, the main sponsor of the House version, the same credit. CMFR will not comment on the intent of either of the two bills, their consequences being far more crucial than their aims, whether these are the stated or the real ones. The road to hell is indeed paved with good intentions, and purity of purpose does not excuse the dire consequences of uninformed legislation.

Whether we’re talking about the Senate’s version or that of the House, by compelling editors to print what they may very well not want to, the right of reply bill will undermine the editorial prerogative of deciding what to air or print that’s at the core of the exercise of press freedom in the newsroom. And yet neither bill even requires proof of the need for a reply in terms of unfair or unbalanced press treatment. It is enough that an accusation or an innuendo has been made—whether by a source or by a journalist is not even specified—for the group or individual that was the subject of a story or comment to demand time or space within 24 hours in the case of the House bill, or within three days in the case of the Senate version. It doesn’t matter how much care editors have taken to be fair by printing or airing the other side according to the professional and ethical standards of good journalism. No proof to the contrary is required, and the medium concerned must publish or air, at the risk of fines, and/or imprisonment and the cancellation of franchises, the so-called reply within the time specified by the bills.

More »

The Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA) first published this report on Dec. 9, 2008.
_____________________________________________________________________

Excessive use of defamation and lese majeste charges by opposing political groups and authorities in Thailand to curb free expression on the Internet has forced a coalition of Internet users comprising media reformers, human rights campaigners, webmasters, bloggers, and operators of online news publications, to form a civic network called the Thai Netizens Network, designed to promote and protect cyber liberty.

The non-partisan group, officially launched on Dec. 2, was a spin-off of an earlier initiative called Freedom Against Censorship in Thailand but its mission is much broader than its predecessor’s—that is, to campaign at the national policy level to promote and protect netizens’ rights, freedom of online media as well as civic journalism, and at the same time to promote a self-regulatory framework to ensure responsible use of internet.

According to the network’s coordinator, Supinya Klangnarong, about 400 URLs have been banned over charges related to criminal defamation and lese majeste pending the court’s hearing. “The problem is that cyber-crime police find it difficult to proceed with these cases in court because they could not arrest the suspected offenders,” said Supinya.

More »

Mr. Basorie teaches journalism at the Dr. Soetomo Press Institute (Lembaga Pers Dr. Soetomo, LPDS) in Jakarta, Indonesia.
____________________________________________________________________

The Maluku islands and Central Sulawesi, two provinces in Eastern Indonesia, were hotbeds of religious conflict from 1999 to 2004. Some sections of the Indonesian press have been partly blamed for fanning communal violence between Muslims and Christians through biased reporting. Although the hostilities between the two communities in the two areas have been contained, friction can resurface. The challenge for journalists is how to enhance religious tolerance in these conflict-prone regions.

The Dr. Soetomo Press Institute (LPDS) in Jakarta, in cooperation with the New Zealand embassy, brought 20 journalists from Maluku and Central Sulawesi as well as from the provinces of West and East Nusa Tenggara to the Indonesian capital Aug. 2008. In a four-day exchange, they shared experiences, hopes, and ideas on the appropriate approaches in reporting conflict and in helping to maintain interfaith harmony.

The practice of peace journalism was duly discussed. Traditional war journalism focuses on the conflict between warring factions but gives insignificant attention to the innocents caught in between. Peace journalism departs from this. It analyzes the conflict and explains its history in its political and social context to allow the public a deeper understanding of the conflict. Further, peace journalism also emphasizes the plight of the victims and the senselessness of the conflict. The intent of such reporting is to stop the conflict and bring peace.

More »

The author is a recent journalism graduate.
_______________________________________________________________________

Journalists are either the most passionate or the most masochistic individuals on earth, preferring to live the hectic and stressful life of deadlines and controversies instead of simply going with the flow.

I remember writing this line when asked by my school paper to come up with welcome remarks during our paper’s anniversary. That was no less than six months ago, when I still believed that journalism is all about passion and dedication to the truth.

After less than half a year covering the business beat, I have finally seen the ugly side of the trade. The corruption in the media my teacher used to warn us about apparently has many faces, and I have seen most of them in my beat.

I remember a conversation I had with a fellow business reporter on why people choose to stick with journalism despite the low pay. According to her, the “veteran” reporters choose to stay for two reasons: either they have already gotten used to the job (the flexibility of time and workplace) or because they simply can’t live without the perks.

More »

Mr. Anderson, born in Olean, New York in 1944, is the Thailand representative of American Citizens Abroad and a U.S. Peace Corps volunteer to Thailand from 1965 to 1967. At the time assigned to a community development role, he then worked in Thailand as a freelance writer and TEFL teacher before transferring to Iran and Saudi Arabia with his Thai wife. He founded northeast Thailand’s first local English language newspaper, The Korat Post. He also writes under the pen name Brian Knight.
________________________________________________________________________

A society that claims to have draped itself around a religion now two and a half millennia old is bound to be somewhat—what is the word?—inflexible when it comes to self-analysis.

Indeed, Buddhism, the religion Thailand adopted so long ago, admonishes what some of its masters call a “passion for analysis and discussion.” This is a perfect fit for Thailand’s social value system that generally encourages obedience, acquiescence, feigned acceptance, repetition, and overall, a lack of innovation or legitimate inquiry.

Buddhist tracts perhaps unintentionally point out a fallacy by stating “If people are ignorant they cannot reason correctly and safely.” To the non-Buddhist-trained mind, this latter statement undermines the very doctrine of teaching as viewed in the west—to wit, that the ignorant really cannot be informed. As an extension of this, there is an implication that teaching of Buddhism per se would be rather fruitless as those ignorant of the Buddha’s admonitions and lessons could not safely or correctly analyze the material contained in the teachings of the Wise One. The assumptions are perhaps a perfect fit for a country like Thailand that is so steeped in deep patronage the very idea of reform, and not just in media ethics, is tantamount to attacking desired reality. And yet the conflicting, contradictory and confusing laws and regulations relating to seemingly all aspects of Thai social behavior scream for immediate redress.

More »