Do journalists have an ethical responsibility towards future audiences as producers of the first draft of history - Essay Example

?Do journalists have an ethical responsibility towards future audiences as producers of the first draft of history? Introduction Journalism is a complex process that raises a tirade of ethical issues in numerous ways. Every decision journalists take, and every sentence they write; has ethical implications. Journalists are seen as ambassadors of information; someone, in some part of the world, is affected by each piece of information they give out. Every stage in the journalistic process has ethical dimensions- from preliminary decisions of what to report, to decisions about gathering and culminating data to make decisions about choosing the audience and the medium for presenting the information. Information is an increasingly important resource and journalists play a crucial role in producing and disseminating that information. Technology has made broadcasting information easier, which makes information more powerful, and therefore makes journalists the carriers of this power. Journalists have influential power on the public; their views can shape decisions and recollections of past events. Given the freedom of expression, journalists now have the power to hold the government accountable for their misgivings, they are able to raise questions on behalf of the public and subsequently force the government to correct their mistakes. They can make history, alter how we remember history and choose what not to include in history. Journalism, Ethics and Society In a democratic world, journalist have the responsibility of reporting corruption, abuse of power and any other item of information that the public has the right to know. They have a special political purpose to seek the truth, and resist the pressure to convey distortions. It is the journalist’s responsibility to check that all information conveyed is true, and that the sources of information are unbiased. Governments and political parties want to use the press for their own benefit, to convey their beliefs, to carry out processes of social change and to express a certain political stance. To serve its core purpose, the press shouldn’t allow itself to be used in that way- it should be critical and project the full picture to its audience. It is under circumstances like these, that journalism ethics come into play. Ethics and journalism have always had an uneasy relationship, James Carey (1987) states that ethics were introduced as an attempt to control journalists, he is of the view that ethics reflect status and class conflict between the owners of the press, the readers and the reporters. Other theories surrounding the emergence of ethics in journalism state that it was an attempt to stop large corporations from giving freebies and junkets to journalists in return for a favourable piece in the press (Christi 1989). In the modern world, journalism ethics are fundamentally governed by the Human Rights; which includes the right to freedom of expression, the right to privacy and the right to information. Society’s expectations of the press and mass media also contribute towards deciding of journalistic ethics. Journalists and the mass media have influential power, which is inherent in their role as informers to the general public. It is their fundamental duty to provide complete information, and not distort the picture in any way; however it is easier said than done. Not only are journalists reporters; but they are also human beings, with an opinion. They have a particular view of circumstances,and do not always see the truth; therefore it is important that they carry out their task as objectively as possible and not involve their own opinion- for their opinion can distort the facts . As Wolfgang Donsbach (1992) points that ethical journalism consists of the efforts of finding out complete information, and present the facts in a neutral way. Journalists who state their opinion, and influence facts to back up their opinion are not only unprofessional, but also un-ethical. An opposing view is expressed by Malcom (1989) where he states every journalist is aware that their work is morally indefensible, and that they betray the people through preying on their ignorance. This view is contested by journalism ethics, and has no value in the world of ethical journalism. The war on Iraq is a classic example of how the government uses the press to play with public sentiment, and the failure of the press to obtain correct, unbiased information. The Bush administration had decided to go to war even before the threat of Weapons of Mass Destruction surfaced; it just needed a reason to legitimize its decision of entering into Iraq. Recent research Robert W. McChesney and John Nichols, (2010) shows that the local media in the United States were uncritical when reporting the justification of the war, they merely conveyed the information that was being fed to them, and did not bother in conducting a background check of their information resources. (Historycommon, 2012) suggests that primary Journalists such as Judith Miller of New York Times were relying on anonymous sources, namely Iraqi defectors for their information (Ahmad Chalabi was their prime source of information, he later rose to acclaim the position of Oil Minister after the invasion). Miller and her partner Engleberg were cautious in projecting the information they received from the Iraqi National Congress(INC), but officials from the bush administration (who were also part of the INC) removed the caveats and words of caution, and presented it as an “independent” news source on live Sunday television; this piece of news would then circulate throughout all the news channels and convince viewers that what they are watching or listening to, is a fairly balanced report. The deceptive coverage of the War on Iraq by the Journalists, helped the Bush Administration in stimulating fear, silence opposition, and convince members of congress to pay for the war. (Cathrine Lutz, 2002) suggested that the example shows how the press was used as a political weapon to entice violence and provoke war- this is one example of the complex relationship between the media and government. Journalists should learn from this ethical mistake, and make sure it is not repeated again; as its results are catastrophic. Max Weber (1920) differentiated between ethical positions i.e., between the ethic of responsibility and ethic of conviction. Ethics of responsibility dictate that the viability of an action is judged by its likely consequences, and not according to the motives behind the action. Whereas the ethics of conviction states the opposite, the viability of an action is judged on the conviction motivating it, and not by its likely consequences. Weber assumed that the two ethics co-exist and are the true essence of human being. It can be argued that the journalists reporting the war on Iraq were acting on the ethics of conviction, and reported only what they thought to be true. Information transmitted by journalists has a universal effect and can have drastic consequences, especially in the era of mass media. A widespread example is the rape case in India, which after being reported resulted in country wide protests and demands of changing the legal system. Thus, journalists have an ethical responsibility to report correct information best to their abilities, and recheck information and its sources before presenting it, as their actions can have a detrimental effect on history. This statement can be better emphasized by quoting Robert Fisk’s statement “It is a journalist’s job to be a witness to history. We are not there to worry about ourselves. We are there to try and get as near as we can, in an imperfect world- to the truth and get the truth out” History and Collective Memory As mentioned earlier, journalists have the responsibility of transmitting factual, unbiased information to the public. However, there is no guarantee that the information they present will be held true in future representations, when current information becomes “history”. In order to understand this point fully, it is important to know the term “collective memory” and its implications. Collective memory can be defined as a piece of information that is held by more than one person in a group. The group can be small, such as a neighbourhood watch group; or large, such as the European culture. The philosopher Maurice Halbwachs described collective memory as an instrument through which groups and societies implant themselves within individuals. They are, in a sense, a “binder”. Collective memories need to be articulated through mediums such as mass media texts,rituals, celebrations etc. The most conventional method of articulating collective memory is through mass media, since it is easily accessible and universal (Silverstone 1994). It is important to note that collective memory is not necessarily the correct representation of the past; it is merely some version of a past that is chosen to be remembered. These “versions” of the past are constructed through our beliefs, and current events.More so, the lessons learned from the past shape how we make sense of the present (Schudson1997). Going back to the point mentioned earlier, journalists can only ensure that the information they present now is accurate, however they cannot assure that this piece of information will be correctly represented in history, and the main reason behind this uncertainty is the concept of collective memory. Memory can be altered, according to what we or a higher authority chooses for us to remember. Citing an example mentioned earlier about the Iraq war, say the future government of the United States are pro-Bush and agrees with Bush’s decision to go into Iraq. This government will try to manipulate what the future generation remembers about the War on Iraq, through exemplifying certain aspect (which support the war) and hiding others (which show the negative effects of the war). They may, for example, show how certain ethnicities were able to practice their culture openly, but they will hide the effect the Iraq war had on the two Muslim sects, how it led to widespread hatred and resulted in the loss of many lives. If the government constantly projects this image, future generations will never know what actually happened, they will only get a biased view of the situation; but for them, this will be the complete information. Hence, journalists cannot guarantee that their reporting will be portrayed truthfully in the future. However, this does not mean that journalists do not have an obligation to report truthfully and ensure to the best of their abilities that the true information reaches the public in the future. One way of ensuring this is to concretize the information to make sure it does not get distorted. Information can be concretized through physical structures, rituals, artefacts, museums and educational books. Hence, journalists who passionately want a piece of information to be carried forward correctly in the future should make that piece of that concept tangible, so it can be passed down. There are differing views about how collective memory is constructed, theorists such as Halbwach (1992) is of the view that the desire to construct and utilize the past overpower the need to confirm or check the actual origins of the information. On the other hand, Barry Schwartz (1982) states that the main activity in constructing collective memory is “selecting”, where some events are emphasized, and where others are concealed. Groups choose pieces of information that fit their understanding and motives, and ignore the others. It is the duty of future journalists to ensure that they depict the correct picture and not only what fits the situation then. Journalists are able to explain the present in terms of what happened in the past. The media has the ability to blur the line between authentic and inauthentic; as historic events are depicted through a number of mediums; magazines, internet blogs, movies, novels etc. Society as a whole cannot remember the past, it is individual memories that shape the memories of the society through publicly constructing representations of the past (through the medium mentioned above) (Connerton 1989). Individuals also make use of their own memories in order to aid public understanding of the past. Halbwach (1986) stated that individual memories are shaped by accounts available in the community . It is important to note that memory does not have the ability to preserve the past, the memory that remains in one that can be reconstructed by society within its existing frame of reference. Cultural memory is more permanent, and it is solidified through the interaction of “premediation” and “remediation” (Bolter and Grusin 1999; Grusin 2010). Remediation reflects the fact that when certain events or circumstances in history are represented continuously through generations (such as the holocaust, the great depression etc.) in different forms of media; where the original piece of information is lost, and the information that is constantly transmitted by the media is the only one that remains. “Premediation” is a term that means that present media outlines feeling for future experiences. For example the First World War was used as a model for the Second World War.Religion, mythology and law can act as powerful premediators. However, remediation is seen as a powerful strategy to enforce a memory into a society, examples of remediation include the burning twin towers, which symbolize 9/11, the concept of the falling man, which inspired a book and a movie. So another tactic for preserving a memory is to remediate it. Technology & Memory The role of technology is phenomenal in shaping and constructing memory. It has accelerated the conversion from a personal view to a public memory (Reading 2009). Participatory journalism has become a widespread concept recently, and is usually evident in catastrophic events such as bombings, natural disasters and other events. Journalists who cannot be at the site, seek to gather information from those individuals who are already there, and there is a debate among theorists whether the information gathered is factual or just based on opinion; as the general public is not trained to be objective when reporting an event (Duezet.all 2007). Advocates of participatory journalism think that this is revolutionary, and will change the landscape of journalism through making it more democratic and grass root. Given the public’s access to reporting events, and their ability to share pieces of information (mainly pictures) with the general public, raises the question again whether journalists are responsible for the accurate representation of present as future history. Journalists only have a limited ability to ensure that what they are representing is accurate; however they cannot on their own influence collective memory, or individual memory, since this is done by society and not a specific individual. Journalists should ensure that the information they depict from other individuals is as unbiased and completely encompassing as possible. Conclusion Journalism is indeed a first draft of memory, as Zarecka (1994) states, thatthe elements of the past that are remembered are worth knowing about. Hence journalists must seek to solidify the pieces of information that are deemed to go down in history books, and to conceptualize them by depicting them through mass media. Journalists report current events through using repeating models and stories (Bird and Dardenne 1997; Carey 1988; Edy 2006; Kitch 2005; Kitch and Hume 2008; Lang and Lang 1989; Lule 2001; Rock 1973; Smith 1997; Win?eld and Hume 2007; Zelizer 1992). Stories of previous eras are used to contextualize current events, and report special events (Grainge 2002). Journalists ability to witness certain events enables them to make true claims about the past, the present and the future; hence they have the power to influence what is reverberated in the future and what is ignored. It is their responsibility to ensure unbiased information is presented in the future, and they can do this by reinstating it over and over again through as many media mediums as possible. Photojournalism is a medium that can be used as a powerful memory vehicle (Goldberg 1991). Journalism can be understood as system of memories that works as a hub for other memory systems. Hence journalists have the obligation to make their memory hub as factual as possible, to increase the chances of making future memories factual as well. References 1) Archibald, R.R. 2004, The New Town Square: Museums and Communities in Transition. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. 2) Boeyink, David E.1994, How effective are codes of ethics? A look at three newsrooms, in: Journalism Quarterly, 71(1) pp 45-53. 3) Bolter and Grusin. 1999, Remediation: Understanding New Media. London, The MIT Press. 4) Grusin, Richard 2010. Premediation: Affect and MedialityAfter 9/11. London, New York: Palgrave 5) Calabrese, Andrew 2007 ‘Historical Memory, Media Studies and Journalism Ethics’Global Media and Communication 3, p. 363–70 6) Edy, J.A. 2006, Troubled Pasts: News and the Collective Memory of Social Unrest. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press. 7) Erll, Astrid 2009 ‘Literature, Film, and the Mediality of Cultural Memory’ in Astrid ErllandAnsgarNunning, eds, Cultural Memory Studies: An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, p. 389-98 8) Gitelman, Lisa 2006, Always Already New: Media, History, and the Data of Culture, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, Ch1: Introduction: Media as Historical Subjects 9) Kitch, C. 2005, Pages from the Past: History and Memory in American Magazines. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press. 10) Laitila, T.,1995, Journalistic Codes of Ethics in Europe, : European Journal of Communication 10(1) pp 33-48. 11) McCollam, Douglas 2004, ‘The List: How Chalabi Played the Press’, ColumbiaJournalism Review July/August. URL: www.cjr.org 12) Neiger M., O. Meyers & E. Zandberg, eds 2011, ‘Editors’ Introduction’ in On MediaMemory: Collective Memory in a New Media Age Basingstoke: Palgrave, p. 1-18 13) Newsweek 2007, ‘1968: The Year that Made Us Who We Are’, November Newsweek,. 14) Olick, Jeffrey, . 2011 The Collective Memory Reader Oxford UP 15) Peter Novick 1998, That Noble Dream: the ObjectivityQuestion”and the American Historical profession. Cambridge UK: Cambridge Univ Press 16) Reading, Anna 2011, 'The London Bombings: Mobile Witnessing, Mortal Bodies andGlobital Time' Memory Studies 4 (3), p. 298-311 17) Rock, P. 1973, ‘News as Eternal Recurrence’, in S. Cohen and J. Young. The Manufacture of News, pp. 226–43. London: Sage. 18) By Robert W. McChesney, John Nichols. 2010, The Death and Life of American Journalism: The Media Revolution That Will Begin the World Again. National Book Publishers. 19) History Commons 2012, New York Times’ Major WMDs Stories [online] Available at: Read More