Tuesday, 26 March 2013

The role of the media - a reflection


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.

All who have the public interest at heart should reflect on the state of our media and demand higher standards as well as legislative control. Appropriate laws should be used to ensure media responsibility and to inform the social responsibility media organisations have in a democracy. The Australian Government has the responsibility to ensure that if existing legislation is vague or lacking enforcement then other measures should be publicly debated and legislated to protect the rights of all individuals and to ensure a balanced and responsible media committed to the common good and not to sectional interests or powerful individuals.


Dr. Ray Cleary

26th March 2013

No comments:

Post a Comment