Journalism's Lost Ethics

In 1922, editors of all of the major newspapers in the country met in Washington D.C. to establish a universal code of ethics. These executives owed their livelihood to the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America which prohibits Congress from making any law that would abridge the freedom of speech or of the press. Even so, they didn’t see freedom of the press — the freedom of their own industry — as an absolute right. At the time, people still had the common sense to know individual rights, of people and organizations, are relative to the rights of others, have limits, and come with obligations. They also were convinced that the responsibility for regulation of their industry (the limiting of their freedom, so to speak) was their own responsibility, and not primarily of the government. They wanted self-regulation, not government interference, to be the standard bearer for journalistic ethics. With this common goal, they established the “Canons of Journalism” — rules for sincerity, truthfulness, accuracy, impartiality, fair play and decency.

Fifty years later, with the genesis of new media, including tabloid journalism, members of the American Association of Newspaper Editors revised the Canons of Journalism written by their predecessors and renamed it a “Statement of Principles.” Much of the content in the new document reflects the original canons of 1922, but there are three glaring changes which, I believe, reflect the beginning of the environment of moral anarchy in which the media now swim:

1) The 1922 canon on “Fair Play” declared, “A newspaper should not invade private rights or feelings without sure warrant of public right as distinguished from public curiosity.”
• In the revised 1975 standards this entire sentence is removed (Paris Hilton, Lindsay Lohan?)

2) The 1922 canon on “Sincerity, Truthfulness, & Accuracy” stated, “Headlines should be fully warranted by the contents of the articles which they surmount.”
• No standard for headlines is given in the 1975 version, and the standard of “sincerity” is omitted completely.

3) The 1922 canon on “Decency” said, “A newspaper cannot escape conviction of insincerity if while professing high moral purpose it supplies incentives to base conduct, such as are to be found in details of crime and vice, publication of which is not demonstrably for the general good...” • In the 1975 articles, there is no mention of a standard for “decency.”

With the collapse of philosophical foundations, these changes of 1975 should not surprise us. Nor should the changes we see today and the ones we may see in the near future, to the point of a complete abolition of journalistic and media ethics. If as a society we reject our natural sense of right and wrong, we end up all speaking different languages and abandoning the possibility of saying anything is objectively better than anything else.

But we can alter this negative trend. I believe a look back at the long tradition of Western ethics, in particular, the respect for the dignity of the human person and the responsibility of government, industry, and the individual to seek the “common good” of society are the pillars for reestablishing a universal ethical code for the media, and in particular for the world of news.

Thanks to "Mike" for the above information which he found on FoxNews dot com.