Some academics once suggested that news media be operated by those with the most knowledge, wisdom and virtue. The reason was quite simple: Since news media are influential, they may have a negative impact if they are operated by those without social responsibility.
Perhaps these academics' standards were too high. However, the whole society will pay a price if our media are not in the hands of professionals.
Getting "scoops" is certainly the goal for all reporters. But since a scoop is "exclusive," reporters and editors should have much higher standards for the credibility of such reports. At the very least, the "scoop" should meet basic professional requirements of accuracy, objectivity and fairness. Otherwise, how can such "news" meet the test of both society and the media themselves?
Exclusive news should be obtained through legal methods and reasonable processes. Exclusives obtained through dirty tricks hurt the media's efforts to bolster its credibility.
In fact, some methods of getting a news story have become jokes. Take Paul Burrell for example. The former butler of Diana, Princess of Wales, wrote A Royal Duty to expose royal secrets, and his book was published last year. According to Burrell, the Daily Mirror in fact paid him ?300,000 (about US$550,000) in order to publish the content of his book in installments, including Diana's note to him, which reads: "My husband is planning `an accident' in my car, brake failure and serious head injury in order to make the path clear for him to marry."
A recent example is the case of British royal servant George Smith, who suggested falsely to a tabloid that Prince Charles of Wales was having a homosexual relationship with a servant -- in order to get a hefty reward. When such "checkbook journalism" -- in which a publication pays interviewees to answer questions -- becomes a popular new term in journalism, shouldn't we be worried about the situation?
Violating the privacy of others and selling out friends is despicable. But these newspapers' method of gathering news by offering money is also questionable. A reporter should obtain a news story through his or her knowledge, sensitivity, judgment and personal connections. Any involvement in crooked dealings or luring sources with money is unworthy of the profession, and damages the dignity and image of reporters' professionalism.
Recently, many of the media's self-proclaimed "exclusive" stories have caused the public to doubt the media. Some television stations so frequently claim that their reports are "exclusive, that we're unsure whether to laugh or cry.
An article published in The Journalist recently described such exclusive reports as "a poison to professionalism." This description was absolutely right. The author wrote, "The local electronic media's `Taiwanese-style' scoops include almost everything ... This is proof of the electronic media's decline."
Although this is a very serious accusation, it serves as a warning for our journalists to examine their methods. Traditionally, a "scoop" is proof of a media outlet's hard work and effort, and shows the media's concern for informing their viewers better than other outlets. Categorizing reports about hot springs or auctions as "scoops," is a humiliation to the entire profession.
We all understand that competition among the news media is fierce and that the pressure on journalists is intense. But which profession is without pressure?
If we simply sacrifice ethics and restrictions due to pressure, our past efforts to improve news professionalism could be in vain.
Cheng Jim-ming is a professor in the Graduate Institute of Journalism at Chinese Culture University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS