By Cees Hamelink
This epilogue will reflect on the possibility of a meaningful framework for an international code of ethics. The reflection will be located in the context of the search for a new international information order.
ETHICAL PRINCIPLES IN PROFESSIONAL PRACTICE
A point of departure for the reflection can be provided by the already existing professional codes. It can be questioned how they function in professional practice and whether they contain useful directives for an international code. In order to get some insight into the question of “codes and practice”, I carried out a series of interviews with media practitioners in a sample of countries (1). The interviews focussed on the conception of the journalistic function, the values reflected in the execution of this function and the relationship with the structures within which this function is being executed.
Only in a minority of the interviews are professional-ethical principles called superfluous and common sense or national civil laws considered sufficient. “Look, I’ve been in journalism for 25 years. I don’t need people to write me out codes. I know what my responsibility is” (Canada ). In general it was said that the profession ought to set itself certain standards that will qualify the freedom of information, but that at the same time will protect this freedom. “There has to be full freedom of expression, but at the same time the responsibility to justify this” (Kenya). In most of the interviews it is said that professional freedom is in danger when the journalist does not follow responsible ethical principles. “It’s when you become inaccurate and unfair that you re more likely than not to have government encroachment on your freedom” (USA). Professional-ethical principles are seen to play an important role in the protection of the audience and its rights: “A code is necessary for protection against abuses in the name of press freedom” (Norway). The professional code is an important aspect of self-imposed accountability: “Media have to be accountable for their decisions and make room for criticism and rebuttal” (USA).
Most interviewees also indicate that a professional code is potentially a helpful guide in the execution of their function. It could provide them with a set of values to orientate themselves. In discussing the principles that they encounter in their organisations’ written or unwritten rules (such as fairness, truth, objectivity, impartiality), most say to apply such principles (with variations in interpretation) mainly because of lack of something better. In the daily practice of most Interviewees these current professional-ethical principles do not actually fit the reality of journalistic activity. They do not take into account new developments in journalism, both technically and functionally. They do not relate to the appearance of new types of journalism, such as advocacy journalism or analytical reporting. In most interviews there is much qualification with regard to such concepts as factuality and objectivity. There is a general feeling that facts ought to be explained and placed in a frame of reference that would make them accessible. This kind of analytical journalism, it is said, demands more responsibility on the part of the journalist because it involves more personal interpretation. Although traditionally objectivity was related to honesty and fairness, it is now claimed that “being subjective is much more honest and fair” (Norway). The impression from most of the interviews is that the principles currently regulating the relationship of the journalist with the collection, processing and presentation of his raw materials are no longer adequate as they do not reflect the actual reality of daily journalistic practice. This creates a tension in which “you balance between your” personal conviction and the code” (Finland) .
Ethical principles guiding the execution of the professional function need adaptation. That will only solve part of the problem, say some of the interviewees, because “there seems to be a development by which economic factors are more decisive than codes of conduct” (Norway). The execution of the journalistic functions is related not only to ethical values, as most interviews indicate, but also to commercial and political considerations. In this context a specific problem is raised in the majority of interviews: the function of the journalist, as conceived by himself, is very often not fulfilled. Here the interviews coincide very strongly with the results of a study on the Swedish newsmen’s view on the role of the press (2). This study surveys the opinions of some 450 journalists as to the proper roles of newspapers in society, the extent to which newspapers fulfil these roles and factors perceived as a hindrance to the fulfilment of these roles. As regards the roles to be fulfilled, the journalists opine: “Newspapers shall help their readers keep an eye on holders of power in government and private enterprise, they shall provide a comprehensive and comprehensible description of society, and offer the general public a forum where individuals can make their views known.” With regard to the fulfilment of these “roles: “Journalists perceive problems mainly in the low rate of fulfilment of the goals of aiding consumers, scrutinizing local politicians and private enterprises, increasing the reader’s understanding of social issues, providing an objective basis for their formulation of political viewpoints, and extending coverage to groups who otherwise have difficulty making themselves heard (4). The Swedish journalists feel that the roles the press mainly fulfils are providing entertainment and informing the public about general political and social issues. As hindrances for the fulfilment of the roles they perceive as relevant, they indicate the difficulties in securing sufficient and vital information from authorities and private enterprises. There is also the dependence on a limited number of information sources and “the tendency of journalists to come to share the values of the persons they are to scrutinise” (5). As important factors of hindrance mention is also made of the continuing concentration in the newspaper industry and the newspaper’s affiliations with political parties.
The same construction as in the Swedish study appears in the interviews: important functions of the journalistic profession are not fulfilled because of hindrance in the form of political and economic pressures, that stem from the organisational and social structures within which one has to operate.
With regard to the definition of the journalistic function, the “service ideal”, there are varied positions in the interviews. Underlying them is the consensus that the professional function next to the audience’s rights ought to determine the journalists responsibility. In several interviews it is pointed out that an important issue for further reflection is this dialectics between the public rights of the audience and the journalist’s conception of his function. The following conceptions are present in the interviews:
1) In a tiny minority it is stated that the journalist is not to function in the public interest. This statement is in line with statements such as W. P. Hamilton’s (Wall Street Journal): “A newspaper is a private enterprise owing nothing whatever to the public which grants it no franchise. It is therefore affected with no public interest.” In the interviews this position has three aspects:
a) the dissemination of information for personal pleasure: “It is a fancy idea to think that you do a programme for a public. I really do it for myself, to please myself” ( UK) ;
b) the dissemination of information in a completely independent way not touched by any political, social or educational responsibility (6);
c) the dissemination of information to promote the personal political insights of the media entrepreneur (7).
In the majority of interviews the professional function is described as public service, with the following variations:
2) It is the function of the journalist “to inform the public so that it can make up its own mind” (USA].
3) The journalist has an opinion-leading function which is meant “to help preserve and strengthen democracy” (Norway).
4) It is the professional service ideal to contribute to the building of the nation , to educate the masses for an open society which is critical of itself, externally setting new standards which project a vision of development” (Kenya). This function of guidance to the nation’s development “has to be in line with the general policy” (Ethiopia, where “anything that could contribute to healthy nation-building will find its way into the paper”).
5) Public service means the dissemination of knowledge which as “a critical function accompanies so¬ciety’s progress ” (India) in order to educate the audience for the creation of a new social order.
6) The journalist is to serve the people in order to support their political organisation in line with the political party directives, while preserving the cultural and moral values of society. “To serve the public is to be partisan, the critical instrument in this process is party-consciousness” (USSR).
The different forms of public service have in common a certain degree of criticism vis-à-vis the society within which they function. All of them restrict the criticism, however, by a basic agreement with the given parameters of their social system.
In the interviews a number of problems with the existing professional codes become apparent.
1) The general applicability of codes is very restricted, because the principles that are stated have such widely differing interpretations according to social system and conception of the service ideal.
2) “Ethical discussion ought to start with thinking about the meaning of public interest” (Norway). Although there is broad support for the conception of the professional function as a public service, how this service can and should be carried out is hardly elaborated. A key question is: how do the autonomy of the profession and the public need to be informed relate?
3) Most of the principles regulating the treatment of the raw materials are technically and functionally inadequate.
4) The professional-client relationships are insufficiently defined, because they are usually couched in terms of an individualistic type of ethics that does not go beyond relations of a private, personal nature. “We don’t need rules for private morality but for the areas affecting public morals” (Ethiopia).
5) It is unclear how the critical aspect of the professional function relates to the general acceptance of the prevailing social norms and institutions.
6) In terms of international relations ethical principles are limited to such general notions as détente, coexistence, universal brotherhood and love. It is felt that in this respect the existing codes are largely inadequate.
7) “We don’t need codes in the form of the Ten Commandments, but as a guidance for self-criticism” (USA). This is important, because “your own moral presuppositions have to be clarified” (The Netherlands). The existing codes do not provide an adequate and inspiring frame of reference for an ongoing critical discussion of the journalists’ function, its fulfilment and obstruction.
8) The existing codes provide insufficient protection of the journalists’ rights vis-à-vis the institutions that employ them.
However insufficient the present professional codes may be, it is generally experienced by the interviewees that they perform an important function with regard to a number of problems the journalistic profession is confronted with.
1. There is an old saying that “doctors bury their mistakes, lawyers hang them, but journalists put theirs on the frontpage”. This visibility makes journalists a vulnerable professional group. Their mistakes may consist in giving an honest account of what they observed or commenting critically upon what they thought was wrong. Such mistakes have brought journalists to jail in a good number of countries. This evidences the need for a formal clarification of the profession’s rights and freedoms.
But the mistakes journalists make may also consist in the conscious or unconscious distor-tions of private or public events. In such cases private persons or public institutions need access to protective measures. This means that the responsibility / accountability of the profession, i. e. the restriction of right and freedom, also needs formal clarification. Herewith a first aspect of the need for professional-ethical principles is given: the need to formulate both freedom and responsibility of a professional group that being vulnerable and powerful needs protection, but also needs to be protected against.
2. A second aspect is the function professional-ethical principles can fulfil in identifying the professional group vis-à-vis itself. It is an important part of the social significance of professional ethics to coordinate the group members occupational behaviour (8). The professional code sets rules for the internal, collegial performance, attempts to reduce internal competition and tries to eliminate the unqualified and unscrupulous (9). Thereby the code gives some identity and status to the profession. This is certainly important for a professional group that has a long tradition of negative judgements from Søren Kierkegaard’s “The lowest depth to which people can sink before God is defined by the word journalist” to Spiro Agnew’s “effete corps of impudent snobs”. Uncertainty about the identity is a characteristic of journalism and Timothy Crouse’s story is exemplary: “You know,” Rather said when I broached the subject of joint action, “journalists by their nature are not an organized lot. The average journalist, including myself, is a whiskey-breathed, nicotine-stained, stubble-bearded guy, and journalism is not a business that attracts very organized people.” Rather was wearing a beautifully tailored suit and he gave off the healthy glow of a man who has just emerged from a hotel barber shop. I had never seen him smoke and I doubt whether, on a typical day, his strongest exhalation could budge the needle of a Breathalyzer. “(10)
3. A third aspect in the formulation of professional-ethical principles is their role in defining the professional “service ideal”. This is an important aspect of journalistic professionalism. According to Johnson, professionalism is one of the institutionalised forms of occupational control by which an occupational group regulates its producer-consumer relationship. Professionalism sets rules for the definition of the client’s needs and for the manner in which they will be met (11). The professional code defines the ideal to serve the client’s needs and controls the fulfilment of this Ideal.
4. Any professional group needs to be clear about its relationship to the society in which it functions. Professional codes help to incorporate the professional group into a certain ideological structure. The professional-ethical principles define and legitimise the hierarchy of socio-cultural values the journalist needs as an orientation for his relationship with society.
In summary: professional-ethical principles are an outcome of the need of the professional group to devise a set of rules that define and control its rights (freedoms) and duties (responsibilities), its occupational behaviour within the group, its professional ideal and its re-lation to the society within which it functions.
Journalism in almost every nation is guided by certain ethical principles that attempt to cater to the special need of this occupational group. Such principles are found in the national Constitutions, the civil laws, the unwritten rules for daily practice, the conceptions of the professional function, and — most explicitly — in the written professional codes. These codes regulate through a series of ethical principles the relations between the professional journalist and his environment. The interviews with the practitioners indicated that such codes are potentially meaningful instruments, since it was recognized that a coherent set of ethical principles that would define standards of professional performance and responsibility vis-à-vis the clients should be a vital element of the professionalisation of the journalist. On the other hand, a number of problems with the existing codes were mentioned by the practitioners who felt that many of the ethical principles in the codes did not adequately cover the factual situation in which they operate. Most of them shared the opinion that ongoing critical reflection about the ethical aspects of the profession is indeed desirable.
FROM NATIONAL CODES TO AN INTERNATIONAL CODE
This paper departed from the question whether the ethical principles adopted in national professional codes could provide a basis for debate on the professional performance and responsibility in the international exchange of information. Three elements seem to favour a negative answer to that question.
a) As pointed out already, the professional codes are in most cases not really adequately formulated to provide relevant guidance for the behaviour of the professional journalists in the national situation. They do not sufficiently take account of technological, organisational, and functional developments in the profession. Moreover, the professional-client relations are unclearly and incompletely regulated. This causes even more complications when transferred to the international scene, where the role of governments as clients and the rights of audiences are difficult and delicate issues that demand unambiguous regulation. Another weakness of the national codes makes international application dubious: the lack of regulation concerning the journalists’ employers. Exactly because of the transnational nature (and all its political, military, economic implications) of the media institutions involved in international information exchange, it is imperative to have rights and duties of employees clearly spelled out. Yet another problem is posed by the fact that most national codes contain no principles regulating the professional responsibility vis-à-vis foreign countries or the international community.
b) Most of the professional ethical principles that are present in the codes are conceived from the perspective of an individualistic type of ethics. They regulate person-to-person relations and concern the rights and duties of the individual journalist and the individual audience member. It is the characteristic of an individualistic ethics that the individual or the relations between individuals are the subject of the ethical role and the ethical regulation is geared towards decisions that individuals can take. The problem, however, is that journalistic performance and responsibility are concerned with social phenomena, with processes of public communication executed by public institutions. Therefore the professional ethics of journalism will have to deal with the social structures within which it operates and will have to be complemented with a social ethics. In this type of ethics the subject of ethical rule is a collectivity: a social group, a nation, the international community or relations between collectivities. Social ethics is geared towards decisions taken by collectivities. Certainly for the international application the current individualistic approach is insufficient and the regulation of the journalists’ relations with key-categories of his environment (i. e. sources as pressure groups, government, corporate industry) needs critical reflection from the socio-ethical angle.
c) The handicap of the efforts so far to formulate an international code of ethics consists partly in the application of the individualistic approach as mentioned under (b). Yet another problem they face is the application of principles that are common to many national codes, such as public interest, factuality, truth, objectivity, impartiality, and the umbrella-concept that covers the philosophy of most codes: freedom of information. It is, indeed, an attractive thought to take those principles held in common by most national codes and develop on the basis of them an international agreement. Unfortunately this is a somewhat meaningless procedure, because these principles have such widely varying interpretations according to their national contexts that their international adoption does not necessarily bring about international agreement and understanding.
In spite of the obstacles just mentioned, it seems still possible to consider the professional codes adopted on the national level a point of departure for an eventual international agreement. However insufficient they may be, they provide a conceptual framework that could guide the international debate. Three elements are fundamental to this framework:
i) the recognition that freedom of information basically refers to the right of the people to be informed and to express opinions;
ii) the insight that this basic public right determines the performance and responsibility of the professional collector and disseminator of information;
iii) the acceptance that i) and ii) imply the need for a precisely formulated charter of professional rights and duties. Starting from this framework four steps could be taken as a first exploration of possibilities.
1) As was indicated, many inadequacies still exist in the formulation and execution of pro-fessional ethics on the national level. Quite a lot of researcher-practitioner cooperation is needed to repair this. In this respect UNESCO work on national media codes and media councils deserves recommendation and continuation.
2) More documentation and discus¬ion is needed on the different national-cultural Interpretations of key principles in the journalistic occupation. This could be a first step towards the recognition and respect of such differences. As Reuters chairman Gerald Long commented in a discussion on the different conceptions of press freedom: “I am not going to judge other societies and the traditions and beliefs of other societies simply because I have vary strong ideas myself. I think a little humility is very desirable in these matters.” (12)
3) Ethics is not a static exercise, it is action-oriented reflection that critically examines the ethical dimension of human decisions, unearths the principles that guide these decisions and the interests they represent, and in relating theory with practice designs adequate action. Ethics is an ongoing process of improving knowledge, creating awareness and propo-sing implementation. “Even after the code has been adopted, its continuing implementation and revision will involve a process of interaction among all the parties concerned. Thus an effective code should be regarded as a continuing political, legal and economic process, not as a single once-for-alltimes action.” (13) This point of view also holds true for the preparation of an international code. The whole procedure has to be a continuous, critical reflection in which all parties concerned participate. This international platform should comprise the different professional organizations, research institutes, UN units, governments, non-governmental organizations (i. e. churches), and consumer groups. The experiences with such an international platform would also be important for eventual decisions on the nature of the device with which the monitor¬ing of the Implementation of a code could become a continuous process of interaction.
AN INTERNATIONAL CODE AND THE NEW INFORMATION ORDER
If the reflection about an international code is to be meaningful in the present international context, it will have to take serious account of the search for a new international information order. This implies that basic elements of an international code, such as the form of this international instrument, the actors to be covered and the regulations due, are to be designed in accordance with concepts that are germane to a new information order.
In raising the demand for a new ordering of existing information structures, Third World representatives have consistently referred to the interdependence between this new information order and the proposed new international economic order.
In September 1975 the Dag Hamrnarskjôld Third World Journalists’ Seminar stated that “for the new international economic order to emerge, peopIes of both industrialized and Third World countries must be given the opportunity of understanding that they share a common interest in creating international conditions that will permit another development of societies in all parts of the world”. The RIO report, coordinated by Nobel laureate Jan Tinbergen, insisted that “the widening of the capacity to inform must he viewed as an essential component of attempts to create a new international order and, as such, the monopolistic and discriminatory practices inherent in current international information dissemi-nation must be deemed as one of the worst, though subtle, characteristics of the present system”. (14)
In 1976 the non-aligned summit at Colombo declared that “a new international order in the fields of information and mass communications is as vital as a new international economic order”. In these positions the bringing about of a new, international information order is seen as an essential contribution to the advent of a new international economic order. As CarIos Andrés Pérez states it succinctly: “There will never be a new economic international order without the liberation of the information order”.
There can indeed be no doubt that reshaping the international order will demand a fundamental replacement of the stereotyped, alienating and discriminatory sets of ideas that current information structures perpetuate. The transformation of present inequalities and injustices requires “another information” that stimulates socio-political awareness, facilitates participation in decision-making processes, offers alternative social arrangements and expresses cultural diversity.
This proposition implicitly provides an important guide for the journalists international responsibility and for the function of international information.
The relationship between an information order and ecanomic order, however, is a dialecti-cal one: it is also true that drastic changes in economic structures are necessary in order to bring about a radically different information order. Current management of international information structures is an integral part of the existing economic organization of international relations. The information industries in countries with advanced market economies account for an increasing share of those economies, both in terms of labour force and contribution to gross national product. Control of international information has become a vital factor in the global expansion of market economies. Information industries, such as film and TV production firms, news agencies, advertising companies and publishing houses have become important exponents of transnational economic expansion.
In their strategy of diversification many large industrial conglomerates adopted information as a profitable commodity. Between 10% and 15% of the world’s largest industrial and financial corporations have considerable interests invested in the international information trade. Oligopolisation has developed just as in other branches of economic activity: three-fourths of today’s international information market is controlled by some 80 transnational corporations. The global informational control of these corporations is based on their access to three elements that have a decisive influence in the present international economic order: the control of finance capital, the control of technology and the control of marketing channels. (15)
This points to the necessity of perceiving major transnational corporations as key actors to be covered by an international code. The information transnationals will have to submit to such rules as are currently devised within the United Nations, the European Community and the OECD. Information industries will as other industrial corporations need to have their operations regulated with regard to their accountancy and financial movements, their employment policy and employers’ protection, their transfer of technology, training programs and marketing strategies. Yet another key element in the operation of transnational corporations will have to he regulated transborder data flows. With the rapid integration of electronic data processing and telecommunications, national borders have become obsolete in data traffic and transborder data flows have developed as the backbone of transnational business. Such regulations would provide national governments with an instrument to gain a stronger grip on their national development schemes, both economically and culturally.
International organizations, such as the United Nations bodies, have been the central fora where designs for a new international order have been proposed, debated, rejected and adopted. An international code contributing to a new information order will certainly have to comprise as important actors such organizations and regulate their monitoring responsibility.
Reshaping the international order will not only demand structural changes in international relations, but also corresponding national measures. Therefore national governments are among the actors to be covered. Regulations are due regarding their conduct vis-à-vis the fostering of adequate national communication policies and the balancing of national sovereignty versus international exchange.
One of the key elements in the search for a new international order both in economic and informational fields, is the emphasis on the widening of public participation in processes of national and international decision making. This points to the necessity of adopting information consumers as yet another group of actors for which rights and responsibilities ought to be regulated. The basic right to information will have to be guaranteed and the infrastructural conditions for its implementation to be secured. On consumers the responsibility will rest to develop through educational processes an active and critical way of coping with information flows (information literacy].(16)
The next question now is about the form the regulatory instrument should take. Should it be a legally binding instrument with rules for the imposition of sanctions? Or an instrument of moral persuasion that is self-imposed and supported by public opinion? It would seem that the fact that different actors and different regulations are to be covered does exclude a one-dimensional form. It is likely that one will need different instruments to deal with different situations. Generally it could then be said that an international code would be “a multi-faceted regulatory instrument for the relationships between a number of actors in the inter-national information traffic and different aspects of their environment”.
The specific regulations that such an instrument would contain will have to be guided by the basic principles that undergird the current search for a new international information order.
PRINCIPLES OF A NEW INTERNATIONAL INFORMATION ORDER
The dialectical relationship between the new economic order and the new information order has provided the debate with a clear conceptual politico-economic framework. In the Declaration on the Establishment of a new international economic order the major concepts were:
- the sovereign equality of States;
- international cooperation based on equity;
- full and effective participation of all States in international decision-making;
- the right of all States to adopt appropriate economic and social systems;
- the full permanent national sovereignty over national resources.
Herewith the new economic order questions fundamentally some basic assumptions of pre-sent international relations. Firstly the assumption that the current international order is fundamentally sound and only temporarily disorganized. Secondly that both industrial states and Third World countries have an interest in maintaining the present system. Thirdly the assumption that the poor countries are dependent upon the affluence of the rich countries and will eventually benefit from this affluence.
With the rejection of these assumptions the new economic order rejects the current form of international inter-dependence as a dysfunctional, hierarchical relationship between unequal partners. The new order pleads for participation of all States in the international community, but as independent and equal partners. A concept which might be coined for this relationship is “inter-independence”,
Briefly defined the new international economic order stands for: “a global order in which sovereign states — controlling the destinies of their socio-economic systems — participate fully and effectively as independent members of the international community.” It would have to be added that the extent and modus of participation in the international community will be guided by domestic developmental goals, briefly: by “another development”. This national content of the new international order will be based on the meeting of basic needs by way of avoiding imitative patterns and implementing appropriate social change.
This definition can be transferred to the formulation of a new international information order as “a global order in which sovereign States — controlling the destinies of their socio-cultural systems — participate fully and effectively as independent members of the international community”. Concurrent with “another development” national and international policy will be guided by “another information”. This implies an independent, self-reliant policy of which the fundamental principles are:
- basic needs: the fulfilment of these needs (on local, national and regional levels) sets subs-tantial guidelines for the modus and content of informational production and distribution, such as: relevance for peoples’ real situations, contributory to the analysis and understanding of those situations, enabling meaningful participation in the shaping of adequate socio-cultural systems;
- dissociation: the rejection of informational models and structures inherited from alien socio-cultural systems, the development of endogenous models and structures that concentrate on the creative and self-reliant use of local resources, manpower, technology;
- social function: the information policy has to be an integral part of society’s effort to design and implement “another development”, the informational resources will have to function in support of the necessary and appropriate social-institutional changes in order to meet domestic developmental goals, these resources will have to express the genuine political needs and cultural patterns of a society.
With the foregoing reflections some components for the eventual design of an international code of conduct for international information traffic have been indicated. This has been done in the full awareness that there are numerous obstacles on the road to such a code and that there ought to be sufficient scepticism vis-à-vis its possible implementation.
Yet, I would submit that the exercise involved in the design of the code is a useful one. On the way to a new international information order an international code would evidently only represent a minor step. Even so the usefulness would be the pursuing of a highly needed critical debate on such vital issues as accountability, public access and international understanding. An international code and already the debate around its design will keep these issues on the public agenda. Moreover, an international code, designed in accordance with the principles outlined above, will provide a pertinent conceptual framework to guide fur-ther implementation of a new international information order.
1) These interviews were carried out between 1973 and 1976 with top executives in media organizations in the following countries: Brazil, Canada, Ethiopia, Finland, Hong Kong, India, Kenya, Holland, Norway, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States and USSR. Some of the interviewees preferred not to be quoted by name, it was therefore decided to present all of them just as media officials. While the persons interviewed provide a reflection of a particular national point of view, they do not, strictly speaking, represent an official opinion in a given country, nor necessarily the opinion of all professional circles whose opinions often are quite diversified. For practical reasons, however, the following quotations are indicated by referring to the country in question.
2) B. Fjaestad and P. G. Holmlöv, Swedish newsmen’s view on the role of the press, Stockholm, 1975.
3) id., p. 52.
4) id., p. 27.
5) id., p. 53; also J. W. Carey, “The Communications Revolution and the Professional Communicator”, in P. Halmos [ed.], The Sociology of Mass Media Communicators, Keele, 1969, p. 34: “First, the reporter is dependent upon the source for information and builds up over time a certain intimacy and empathy with him. Consequently, he is disposed to take the role of the source, to see events and problems from the standpoint of the source. Second, reporters receive little feedback from their amorphous and disorganised audiences. However, they are likely to receive considerable feedback — both commendation and criticism — from sources. As a result, the reporter is disposed to internalise the attitudes and expectation of the source; and indeed, to turn the source into the ultimate audience.”
6) This position was expressed at the UNESCO Florence colloquium (April 1977) by i. a. David Anable (Christian Science Monitor) who said that journalists because they are not government officials and have to be completely independent from governments, have no responsibility for such areas as international understanding, promotion of peace, nation building, or protection of the national culture.
7) Lord Beaverbrook, the British newspaper tycoon, in a report to the Royal Commission on the Press: “I run the newspaper purely for the purpose of making propaganda.”
8) R. M. Mclver, “The Social Significance of Professional Ethics”, in the Annals of the American Academy, 1955, pp. 118-124.
9) H. Wilensky, “The Professionalization of Everyone?” in American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 70, 1964, pp. 137-158.
10) T. Crouse, The Boys on the Bus, New York, 1972, p. 244.
11) T. Johnson, Professions and Power, London, 1972, pp. 45-47.
12) in Media Asia, Vol. 3., No. 3, 1976.
13) From UN-ECOSOC Document on “Issues Involved in the Formulation of a Code of Conduct”, 1976, par. 24.
14) Reshaping the International Order (coordinated by Jan Tinbergen), New York, 1976, p. 111.
15) cf. C. Hamelink, The Corporate Village, Rome (IDOC), 1977.
16) cf. C. Hamelink, “An Alternative to News”, in Journal of Communication, Autumn 1976, pp.120-123.