Holiday time gives you the opportunity to take things a
little slower and to read newspapers, journal articles, social media and books
more thoughtfully. Reading one of Melbourne’s daily newspapers during this time
alerted me to the fact that journalism and reporting is on the decline. It was
apparent that some stories were run day after day in a slightly different form
and new news was thin on the ground, as we say. Headlines bore little
resemblance to the content of the articles.
The range of opinion writers during this time and their contributions to
their subject matter left a great deal unsaid or not well understood. Lindsay Tanner spoke in a similar fashion
about the media in his book Sideshow:
dumbing down democracy, when he stated what many across the country had
been thinking for a number of years, that the media had reached an all-time low
with debates trivialised and often reframed as entertainment. Many journalists
are now writing opinion pieces that seem to reflect their own ideology or
political bias. Editors appear to like the smart headline or pander to
perceived public opinion. The
retrenchment of many seasoned journalists is now reflected in the written
word. Thankfully, this did not apply to
the crossword during the holiday season; otherwise I may have cancelled my
subscription permanently. Despite all, the media organisation that publishes my
chosen paper assures the reader of quality reporting for 2013.
In a democracy we all want newspapers and the media in
whatever form, including social media, to be a free press and not subject to
state interference, censorship or control.
Likewise media ownership should not dictate what the media publishes, and,
as with government, should not exercise censorship or control that favours
certain agendas or causes that suit their owners. In a democracy the need is
also to ensure that the media acts responsibly and in the interest of the
public or common good, reflecting the values and aspirations of a civilised
community that is concerned for the life of all its members, rich and poor,
born locally or arrived from other shores. Where this line is transgressed or
trivialised, ignored or abused, there needs to be some form of public recourse
to amend and redress false or inaccurate claims or the abuse of privacy. The media in whatever form has a privileged
and important role in a democracy in reporting and analysing public policy,
corporate activities, and community organisations including churches, synagogues
and mosques, but in doing so it is not above the law, and like the medical and
the legal professions, to name just two, some form of regulation or oversight
is necessary in our increasingly complex society of today. The media must also
critique and evaluate its own performance and ask whether a non-elected
individual or organisation has the right to decide the future direction or
behaviour of a community. Hasty judgements, sensational reporting for its own
sake and engaging in partisan reporting should be avoided and replaced with
factual reporting. Opinions should be restricted to the opinion pages and be
clearly identified. While the media should be entitled to express a view it
must also be aware that it is only one voice in shaping and forming what values
our society should embrace and not set itself up as the sole voice.
The real question is what sort of and to what extent
regulation by the state is necessary or desirable? Recent events suggest that
the time has come for new thinking on the matter. The whole community has been seduced into
participating in the charade that is called news reporting. The Leveson inquiry
in the UK exposed many shortcomings in the media with one-sided reporting,
phone-tapping, abuse of privilege at the highest level, close personal
relationships between politicians and corporate leaders seeking government
contracts, and the promotion of views to shift public opinion to reflect a
particular ideology. A case in point here in Australia has been the manner in
which the mining industry has sought to defend itself against the federal
government’s mining tax. Self-interest and profits have now become the number
one priority, rather than the common good. Further it appears that cheap
personal shots and guilt by innuendo are favoured over factual news
reporting. The values of honesty,
integrity, fairness and concern for the common or public good are of lesser
importance.
Any form of statutory
regulation being considered needs to guarantee the independence of editors and
journalists from owners and shareholders, so they are free to report without
fear or favour, but with evidence and balance. Freedom of the press, like
freedom of speech, is not unconditional.
In a democracy, freedom of the press means freedom to act within the
law, which includes laws against defamation; truth and accuracy in advertising;
freedom from invading personal privacy; and ownership of intellectual property.
In any new form of regulation the media must be required to separate evidence
from personal opinion. Citing reference material should also be considered.
Dr. Ray Cleary
26th March 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment