14
This article was downloaded by: [University of North Carolina] On: 10 November 2014, At: 23:15 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK Journal of Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hmme20 Comparative International Media Ethics Tom Cooper Published online: 17 Nov 2009. To cite this article: Tom Cooper (1990) Comparative International Media Ethics, Journal of Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality, 5:1, 3-14, DOI: 10.1207/ s15327728jmme0501_1 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327728jmme0501_1 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly

Comparative International Media Ethics

  • Upload
    tom

  • View
    217

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Comparative International Media Ethics

This article was downloaded by: [University of North Carolina]On: 10 November 2014, At: 23:15Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Mass Media Ethics:Exploring Questions of MediaMoralityPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/hmme20

Comparative International MediaEthicsTom CooperPublished online: 17 Nov 2009.

To cite this article: Tom Cooper (1990) Comparative International Media Ethics, Journalof Mass Media Ethics: Exploring Questions of Media Morality, 5:1, 3-14, DOI: 10.1207/s15327728jmme0501_1

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327728jmme0501_1

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information(the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor& Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warrantieswhatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purposeof the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are theopinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor& Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should beindependently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francisshall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs,expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arisingdirectly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes.Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly

Page 2: Comparative International Media Ethics

forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 3: Comparative International Media Ethics

Journal o/ Mass Media Ethics Vol. 5. NO. 1. pp. 3-14

Copyright 1990 by Lawrence Erlbaurn Associates. Inc.

Comparat ive International Media

By Tom Cooper Emerson College

O Reviews show that comprehensive studies of international media ethics are necessarily incomplete because not all countries have either media codes or comparable measurement instruments. This article reviews major studies of international and national approaches to media ethics and describes contexts for global studies and comparisons. The three likely universals of truth, responsibility, and the drive for free expression are hypothesized, and codes are explored to see which patterns endured.

Research suggests three major areas of worldwide concern within the field of communication ethics. The first could be called the quest for truth, which includes a global concern with media objectivity and accuracy. The second could be described as the desire for responsibility among social (i.e., professional) communicators. This concern includes differing regional emphases on professionalism, accountability, justice, equality, loyalty, priorities (to government, public, peers, or personal integrity), adherence to social mores (e.g., cultural notions of secrecy, privacy, source protections, etc.), and ulti- mate motivation issues (e.g., conflict of interest, bribery, and self promotion). The third, which might be called the compulsion for free expression, includes differing regional emphases upon free flow of information, censorship, regulation, and freedom of the press and speech.

Because these three areas can be categorized in numerous other ways, and are suggestive instead of conclusive, they are each, based on available research, candidates for universal status. That is, each concern (and perhaps others) may prove to be common to human

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 4: Comparative International Media Ethics

beings as individuals or to such collective organisms as societies, cultures, or nations.

However, such a claim may not be assumed on speculative evidence, nor may it be used as a generalization. Methodical analysis is necessary.

Defining Universals

Throughout the scholarly literature dealing with universals is the underlying assumption that a phenomenon in question pervades, transcends, or includes all elements within its universe.

A "growing literature on the subject of ethical universals and a unified theory of human nature" (Little, 1978, p. 186) springs from sociology (Selznick, 1963), anthropology (Linton, 19531, and philosophical ethics itself (Brandt, 1959). The serious discussion of universals is both broad and ancient.

The more embryonic discipline of communication, or particularly the subdiscipline of mass communication ethics, has not yet developed a sizable literature defining universal tendencies. However, from one perspective, early attempts by such Americans as Shannon and Weaver, (1949), Schramm (1954), and others to construct simple models of communication was an attempt to distill simple universal essences from a complex of situations and technologies.

International Communication Context

Codes are often classified and categorized, much as countries tend to be pigeonholed. Whereas dividing the world into fragments may lead to dangerous stereotypes about the countries within the stereotype (e.g., the West, the Soviet bloc, the unaligned countries, etc.), international communication realities are sha by alliances, or at least relationships, among countries. Bertrand (1 !=' 85) made a helpful observation when he noted that the West is more concerned with ethi- cal issues involving freedom, and the Third World is more interested in issues regarding justice (p. 9).

Codes may be unique to nations, and some codes reflect deep ideological stances associated with groups of countries. Altschull(l!J84), for example, used the loose categories of Market, Marxist, and Advancing to describe underlying articles of faith for three groups of countries. In this case, he described the press systems, but many of the principles would also apply to other forms of communication (pp. 279- 285).

To the extent that such generalizations are accurate, nations, like codes, display patterns of agreement that frequently allow codes to be

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 5: Comparative International Media Ethics

more easily understood and, in some cases, more easily grouped. Categories, however, tend to be arguable.

Despite all the differences and diversities among codes throughout the world, and the levels at which they are almost impossible to analyze, it may be useful to b e p some analysis at the surface level and to look at specific codes aimed at directing media behavior as a first step in cataloging global ethical universals.

The Three Contenders

Three strong, logical contenders mentioned earlier as media ethics universals are (a) the quest for truth, (b) desire for responsibility, and (c) a compulsion for free expression. It is clear, however, that these cannot be demonstrated to be pure universals (i.e., the entire human population cannot be meaningfully and consistently surveyed on these matters).

This is not an attempt to claim that these are cultural universals. Using the important Kroeber and Kluckhohn (1952) definition of culture, it is possible to determine that nations and cultures, though they may significantly overlap, are distinctive (pp. 80-82). Nations, for example, are officially constituted, have official governing organs, and may include several cultures. National representative universals are more specifically identified because cultures do not always have conscious parameters (nations have borders and written identities), clear-cut citizenry, or use mass communication.

Many codes discussed later represent specific professional organizations or institutions within a nation and thus may be perceived as national or, as with the Canadian Association of French Language Journalists, intranational. One should never rule out, however, that a code may also represent one or many cultures.

Within a framework of such qualification, the available evidence suggests that, within the universe of intranational, national, multinational, and global codes available for comparative research, at least 3 principles emerge as leading contenders for consensus. In his 7 Laws of Journalism, Altschull (1984) mentioned, in reference to press rationale, 2 of these themes: (1) "all press systems endure the doctrine of social responsibility" (p. 288); and (2) under his comparative Purposes of Journalism, he places "truth" at the top of his three lists ("Market: To seek truth, Marxist: To search for truth, Advancing: To serve truth," p. 284). As Altschull (1984) quoted him, Albert Camus, upon accepting the Nobel Prize in 1957, more indirectly alluded to two of these themes: "the nobility of our calling will always be rooted in two commitments difficult to observe: Refusal to lie about what we know, and resistance to oppression" (p. 288).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 6: Comparative International Media Ethics

These remarks, however accurate, are only aspects of a larger reality. Quantitative evidence is more readily obtained through the combined studies of Jones (1980), Leppanen (1977l, and Alanen (1979).

Quantitative Surveys of Codes

Although he does not mention the exact number of codes examined, Jones (1980) described codes from 50 countries, discussing them within their geographical areas: E u r o p 2 4 countries, North and South America-7 countries, and Africa and Arab states-5 countries. He was careful to discuss national and intranational codes country by country and kept them separate from international (whether multinational or global) codes. Virtually all the codes assembled mention journalism or press in their title or within the title of the sponsoring organization. Exceptions, such as Tanzania, suggest that the scope of media and content covered may extend beyond journalism.

Harry Leppanen (1977) focused his study on journalistic codes, listing 59. These included multinational codes such as the International Federation of Journalists' 1954 Declaration of Principles and the Draft International Code of Ethics adopted by the United Nations Economic and Social Council in 1952. The larger number of national and intranational codes predate 1978. Leppanen's research is the cen- terpiece of Bruun's (1979) comparative research and indeed provides the only empirical data within his published review of codes.

There is admitted overlap between the codes studied by Jones (1980); Leppanen (1977); Bruun (1979); and Alanen (1979). For example, the International Federation of Journalists' Declaration of 1954 is used by both Bruun (1979) and Nordenstreng and Alanen (1981, p. 215). Alanen (1979), however, used 50 codes (compared to Leppanen's 59 codes and Jones's 50 countries), 42 (possibly 44, depending on category scheme) of which he listed b country and the others by multinational association (pp. 153-166). & ven countries are represented by two codes. Alanen was further interested in comparing the codes with 44 other international instruments (12 treaties, 14 declarations, and 18 resolutions) that contain direct or indirect reference to the mass media (Jones, 1980, p. 63).

Because the comparison between international standards (documents) with professional manifestations of ethics (codes) influenced his categorization, Alanen's (1979) 7 categories are consid- erably different from Bruun's (1979) 18. Jones (19801, rather than using subject headings for categories, listed 5 "factors of difference" among the codes, followed by "5 elements commonly to be found in most codes" (p. 63). Thus, each comparative scheme is significantly different.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 7: Comparative International Media Ethics

Despite the differing methodologies, types of codes, purpose of the research, and depth of scholarship, a comparison of the studies revealed interesting overlaps. In Survey I (Leppanen, 19771, the theme represented more than any other topic was the honest and true dissemination of news. It appeared in 53 of the 59 codes. In Survey I1 (Alanen, 1979) the theme mentioned most was the combination of objectivity, veracity, and honesty, which appears in 49 of 50 codes. Jones (1980), who did not quantify his findings, led his 5 "elements which are commonly to be found" with "the emphasis upon the integrity, truth, and objectivity of all forms of news collection and dissemination" (p. 63).

Thus, in Survey I, approximately 90% of all codes focused on the general theme of truth, truthfulness, objectivity, honesty, accuracy, and so forth. In Survey I1,98% of all codes did so, and in Survey 111, a very high, if not the highest percentage (figures not given) of all codes did. Further research might well reveal that a high percentage of these codes also place the theme of truthfulness as the most important one within journalism, if not within communication.

The Quest for Truth

There can be no pretense that any or all of these codes directly and literally mentioned the quest for truth. As Bruun (1979) indicated, the National Association of Hungarian Journalists may call for more verification and accuracy in conformity with reality, whereas the Japanese Nihon Shinbun Kyodai's code called for news reporting to "convey facts accurately and faithfully" (p. 28). The Code of Ethics adopted by the U.S. Society of Professional Journalists and by the Journalists' Association in Colombia "believes the duty of the journalist is to serve the truth. . . . Truth is our ultimate goal" (p. 28). Thus, codes categorized together may vary considerably in language, emphasis, and in the aspects of truthfulness articulated. The quest for truth is simply a collective superobjective.

Truth itself, however translated, cannot be said to have a monolithic objective (and this word is used paradoxically) meaning. Merrill and Ode11 (1983), for example, listed 5 levels of truth- transcendental, potential, selected, reported, and perceived. Moreover, numerous philosophical and other texts question the existence, means, and levels of truth, objectivity, accuracy, and verification (pp. 172-174). What can be said is that, based on available representative research, the longing for the communication of truth particularly by journalists but also by social communicators in toto tends most toward conscious global universality. It must be remembered, however, that social

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 8: Comparative International Media Ethics

contexts, linguistic factors, and many other considerations many levels of interpretation to the notions of truth and truthfu rYde ness

The Desire for Responsibility

In one sense, it is extremely difficult to distinguish the desire for responsibility among social communicators from most other categories. Tautologically, one of the primary responsibilities of journalists, in particular (in many countries, entertainers are offered forms of poetic license) is to be truthful. Journalists who are deliberately deceptive to their publics and their employers are consid- ered irresponsible. Moreover, because responsible is equated in many codes with, or closely related to, professional, and because many codes seek to define professional behavior, a second tautology appears-to disobey a professional code is, by definition, to behave irresponsibly. At one level, many codes define responsibility or at least ethical responsibility.

The word and notion of responsibility is a key concept that cannot be easily refuted. Jonas's (1984) entire book was a response to the question "why is responsibility brought to the fore as the key principle of the 20th century?" Fifty-two groups of media professionals and enthusiasts in 19 countries affirmed the central significance of responsibility to communication in a 90 minute te~econference.~ Moreover "The Responsibilities of Journalism" conference at Notre Dame University in Indiana in 1982 spawned Schmuhl's (1984) useful book by that name. These are only a few important examples.

A major discussion area within code study might be called re- sponsibility to . . . . For example, Jones's (1980) third representative universal candidate, professionalism, reflects responsibility to the profession. He also mentions responsibility (e.g., loyalty) to one's country, which, in turn, is closely related to the notion of social responsibility, such as responsibility to society. About half the cate- gories advanced by Bruun (1979) relate directly to the theme of social responsibility-professional secrecy (42 codes), following the objectives of mass communication (42 codes), respecting rights to privacy (39 codes), not accepting personal benefits (37 codes), avoiding plagiarism and slander (33 codes), and many others.

Alanen (1979) provided a system of categories in which global responsibility (i.e., to international law or global requirements) was measured. From this larger definition of social responsibility (toward the maintenance of global peace and security), 28% mentioned the communicator's responsibility toward the maintenance or establishment of peace and security; 24% were concerned with the responsibility for friendship and cooperation among nations, and 36%

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 9: Comparative International Media Ethics

were concerned with racial equality and discrimination. The majority of codes do not reach to such international scope, and many codes may represent journalists who do not sense that the responsibilities just listed are specific to pumalists or mass media.

It is significant to note, however, that, as previously stated, responsibility to the truth or truthfulness was elemental in 98% of all codes. Other obligations, such as responsibilities, were mentioned in 94% of all codes. The notion of social responsibility is inherent within the Alanen schema, and thus did not appear as an official category.

The important overall unifying ingredient of virtually all codes was the expectation that the communicator be accountable or responsible to, if not for, people other than him- or herself. Such people were described in differing orders of magnitude-employers, fellow workers, all professionals, all members of the institution, and so on. There was the implicit or explicit expectation that such people, or the ideals that served such people (justice, fairness, truth, equality, etc.), will be acknowledged through behavior. Such behavior was socially responsible. Depending upon how this social responsibility was defined, roughly 85% to 100% of the codes examined in all three surveys called for or assumed social responsibility.

The Drive for Free Expression

Freedom of expression has many interpretations and contexts. For example, the Hungarian code previously cited (Bruun, 1979) mentioned in "the spirit of the Freedom of the Press as laid down in the Constitution of the Hungarian People's Republic" (p. 44). The Norwegian Code, "Journalist, Be Careful," said: "A free press has an important function in our society by disseminating information, debate and social criticismff (p. 44).

Bruun (1979) and Leppanen (1977), from whom these codes were quoted, noted 33 citings of freedom of information in 59 codes (56%), which was a lower ratio than the Alanen (1979) listings under free flow of information, which included 34 codes (68%). It should be noted that free flow of information has specific meanings, literature, and ongoing debate about its interpretation and implementation. Jones (1980) used this phrase within his second "elements commonly to be found" and defined the flow as "from governments to those whom they govern, and from those who are governed to governors" (p. 63).

Jones's listing (1980) to the contrary, the 56% and 68% listings of the other two surveys does not prove universal status. However, because freedom of the press, freedom of speech, and similar phrases are already specified in most national constitutions, and because the responsibility for maintaining that freedom is often given to

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 10: Comparative International Media Ethics

governments or courts, the notion is often inferred between the lines of a code. Thus, call for freedom of expression must, on the basis of this research, maintain borderline status. Such a universal can only be in- ferred.

Moreover, freedom has vastly different implications in different codes. A common interpretation of Marxian usage of the term freedom of the press emphasized the freedom of the poor, enslaved, or otherwise oppressed to publish and broadcast, not just those who can afford (i.e., those who control) media institutions and technology. In many more libertarian type codes, freedom has the emphasis of freedom from government control or interference. Thus, at one level, this is a surface representative universal, fixed by language, if not rhetoric. However, the call for free expression may, in fact, be indigenous to human beings, and thus transcendent of its many interpretations. At some level, communication ethics focuses upon the concern that organisms (whether individuals, institutions, governments, classes, minorities, or the media they use) should not be muzzled. However, there is not widespread agreement about whose voices should be heard, to what extent, and through which media.

Some Gray Areas

Beyond these three areas, one of which (the freedom of the press concept) must be viewed as borderline, are many overlapping content areas among codes. For example, both Bruun (1979) and Leppanen (1977) noted that all Nordic codes stipulated a need for clarity between news and comment (e.g., editorial comment) and called for headlines that were truly warranted (Bruun, 1979, p. 44). There were dozens of similar areas relating more to specific responsibilities, to the implementation and adoption of codes themselves, and to the gray zones between and among representative universals.

Such gray zones included areas of tension between a professional's responsibility to tell the truth and to protect the security of (i.e., be responsible to) the nation. For example, the Code of Press Ethics in Burma stated "nothing shall be published that will endanger the security, stability, and sovereignty of the Union" (Bruun, 1979, p. 42). According to Universal 1, the extent of truth telling may be restricted by this mandate. Moreover, with Universal 3, the freedom of the journalist or media (but not necessarily the freedom of the nation or its people in aggregate) was potentially restricted (through censorship) by such wording. There was nothing novel about this tension between universals, which reflects the ancient debates about responsibility versus freedom, truth versus necessity, or in more modern literature,

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 11: Comparative International Media Ethics

Cooper 11

the problems posed in the Journal of Mass Media Ethics or by Bok (1979).

Like larger philosophical and political systems, codes may call for freedom, responsibility, and truth, but not examine the consequent contradictory implications. Some codes do account for potential contradictions within their principles and wording; most ignore larger political, philosophical, and linguistic contexts in which contradiction occurs.

Codes within a single country or even within different professional branches of a single media industry may be contradictory, differ in emphasis, or even differ in direction as to the ethical behavior of communicators or the moral purpose of communication. Universal essences are chameleon-like in complexion and may adopt the language and social context of their environment.

Pervasive Essences-A Summary

Given these distinctions, essences pervaded codes that represented numerous intranational and national, but fewer multinational and global codes. The most dominant essence was the quest for truthfulness, if not truth. Empirically, the theme of truth and truthfulness was most pervasive. The second most dominant theme, that of responsibility, particularly social responsibility, and its subthemes-professionalism, loyalty, and accountability-was inherent within a vast majority (85% to 100%) of codes. It was specified within almost as many. The theme of freedom of expression-and the subthemes free flow of information, freedom of press, and so forth- was articulated less frequently than truth or responsibility and, empirically, was a borderline representative universal. However, the contexts of codes, the constitutions of nations, and the subtexts within codes point toward the universality of concern with the concept of freedom.

These three ideals have been carefully termed candidates for the status of conscious representative universal ethical principles. Candidates are a necessary qualification because three studies and fewer than 100 codes are not globally universal. It is possible that the methodologies, translations, and materials within any (or all) of the three studies conceal more than they reveal. It was also evident that the three themes isolated within this article could be recategorized, subcategorized, or renamed in a variety of ways. However, this simple rank ordering of theme frequency may give evidence of what could be discovered in larger, more current studies of consistent methodology. It may, with the necessary leap of faith, point toward thoughts and feelings within the minds and hearts of human beings worldwide.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 12: Comparative International Media Ethics

Dangers and Values of Universals

If universals were understood as essences, not as literal absolutes or as concrete objects, they might inform us of subconscious connections at deeper levels. Overarching universals are like bridges that attempt to connect a widespread sea of islands. Such islands, however, are already connect& at deeper levels, as would be revealed if the sea were drained of its water. Within this analogy, surface universals may be more profound than is often imagined, as they may reflect, in some diminished and imlabed way, the nature of what is undernemth and indeed what is connected to othg islands of humanity.

To the extent this analogy holds true within the field of media ethics, universals are valuable. At a time when we appear to be evolving from a condition in which belligerent global superpowers have the power to eliminate humanity into a period of greater global accommodation, there may be far more value in the building of bridges than the maintenance of stereotypes. Those within mass communication are not exempt from the choice between finding common ground between peoples and maximizing differences that alienate and further divide.

To the extent they are wisely understood, universals may help to develop an openness among those with polarized points of view. Expert negotiators always begin with common ground between people(s1 before seeking to reconcile differences. One of the best ways to understand each other is to first find that common element present within us as individuals.

The discovery of universal feelings, truths, and perceptions that are already present increases one's tolerance and may broaden one's understanding of multifaceted notions, such as truth, responsibility, and freedom. From this learning comes, at both the personal and international level, more meaningful relationships that, in turn, increase respect, empathy, and openness.

From this process can come a parade of other benefits: cooperative projects and aspirations, improved communication skills at the international level, better cross national/cross cultural exchange, the increase of knowledge and hopefully wisdom, and other steps contributing to world peace. Acknowledging common purposes, aspirations, feelings, and ideals may contribute to the process by which persomil and national defenses begm to thaw.

It is possible to posit that ethics themselves, when in search of common ground, can be a meaningful universal. As Nordenstreng and Alanen (1981) noted:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 13: Comparative International Media Ethics

The question of whether ethics is an inherent aspect of human communication seems by now almost obsolete. How could we deny that values and, thus, questions of ethics, are essential to the phenomena of human communication, which is a fundamental element in social relations? Ethics should indeed by understood as a pervasirx [italics added] aspect of communication. (p. 225)

The increasing discussion of media ethics and shared values, where minds and hands are open, can lead to a greater cooperation among media professionals worldwide.

However, the ultimate ideal in this regard would not be the perfectly acceptable international code. The pure ideal would be a world in which codes are unnecessary. Realistically, however, there are many challenges and changes facing both scholars and communicators. There is a current global flood of technologies, terrorism, international tension, and telecommunicated tragedy. The cooperative possibilities and ethical challenges created by new tech- nologies and world conditions pose questions that will take increasing research by scholars in many countries to correctly frame and answer.

Notes

1. From Communications Ethics and Global Change by Thomas W. Cooper, with Clifford G. Christians, Frances Forde Plude, and Robert A. White. Copyright O 1989 by Longman, Inc. Adapted and reprinted with permission.

2. The teleconference, which had five co-sponsors, including the Association for Responsible Communication, took place July 28, 1985, and included over 1,200 participants from six continents.

References

Alanen, A. (1979). Iournalistien Eettiset Siiiinnot-Kansainvalinen Oikeus [Journalism ethics codes-International values]. Unpublished master's thesis, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Tampere, Finland.

Altschull, J. (1984). Agents of power. New York: Longman. Bertrand, C. (1985, March). Ethics in international communication.

Intermedia, pp. 9-13. Bok, S. (1979). Lying: Moral choice in public and private life. New York:

Vintage. Brandt, R. (1959). Ethical theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Bruun, L. (Ed.). (1979). Professional codes in journalism. Prague:

International Organization of Journalists.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014

Page 14: Comparative International Media Ethics

Jonas, H. (1984). The imperative of responsibility. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Jones, C. (1980). Mass media codes of ethics and councils. Paris: UNESCO.

Kroeber, A., & Kluckhohn, C. (1952). Culture. In unpublished Papers of the Pabody Museum (Vol. 47). Cambridge, UK.

Leppanen, H. (1977) Iournalistien Kansaliset ja Kansainvaliset Sdannostot [National and international journalism codes]. Unpublished master's thesis, Department of Journalism and Mass Communication, University of Tampere, Finland.

Linton, R. (1953). Universal ethical principles: An anthropological view. In R. Anshen (Ed.), Moral principles of actwn (pp. 645-660). New York: Harper & Row.

Little, D. (1978). Calvin and the prospects for . . . natural law. In G. Outka, & P. Ramsey (Eds.), Norm and context in Christian ethics (pp. 175-1971. New York: Scribners.

Merrill, J., & Odell, C. (1983). Philosophy of journalism. New York: Longman.

Nordenstreng, K., & Alanen, A. (1981). Journalism ethics and international relations, Communication, 6, 225-254.

Schmuhl, R. (1984). The responsibilities of journalism. Notrc Dame, I N : University of Notre Dame Press.

Schramm, W. (Ed.). (1954). Process and effects of mass communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Selznick, P. (1963). Natural law and sociology. In J. Cogney (Ed.), Natural law and modern society (pp. 154-193). Cleveland, OH: World.

Shannon, C., & Weaver, W. (1949). The mathematical theory of communication. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Uni

vers

ity o

f N

orth

Car

olin

a] a

t 23:

15 1

0 N

ovem

ber

2014