Exercised from introspection

Journalism being what it is, even the most virtuous journalists, operating from what they view as the best of motives, inevitably will produce some morally unsatisfactory results. In either case, it is worth understanding what went wrong and how to prevent its recurrence — “THE VIRTUOUS JOURNALIST.”

Yet journalism remains an honourable profession, because it has an honourable aim, the circulation of information, including news, comments and opinion. This is an honourable aim because the health of a community - especially a community that has any pretensions to democracy - depends on it. There is no reason why journalism should not have further aims as well, such as entertainment, so long as these are subordinated to the overall aim of the circulation of information — “ETHICAL ISSUES IN JOURNALISM AND THE MEDIA.”

JOURNALISTS play dual roles in the qualitative development and growth of society. These roles need not be conflictual. Primarily, journalists serve as watchdogs of society, providing information on developments that take place. Additionally, they serve as activists. It is how well these roles are played that would make them relevant and critical for societal growth. In playing their watchdog roles, journalists provide information to create awareness. Indeed, awareness creation is the most potent asset of the media.

In recent days, the media have done extremely well in exposing the rot within the premix fuel industry, especially the incidence of diversion of the highly subsidised product from the reach of fishermen for whose interest and welfare the taxpayers’ money is applied to subsidise the cost of the product. The other dysfunctional aspect about this dastardly act is whether the product ends up being mixed with diesel or petrol to be sold to motorists and endanger their vehicles.

Read Also: Consumers angry with ECG as they can’t buy power with prepaid cards

The media must be commended for their unwavering effort to expose the high level of corruption and deceit within the industry. But the other side is that beyond this watchdog responsibility, some journalists have added activism and it is in this area that sometimes the journalists veer into the path that must be reserved for partisan propagandists. The didactic and sometimes resort to innuendo and blackmail cloud the boundary between objective commentary and partisanship.

There are diffused comments which are made by journalists which ordinarily must come from partisan political activists but not professional journalists. Examples which abound and readily come into mind include, “We want to see the President take action before the close of the day”, or that, “If indeed the President is the liberal democrat that he professes to be” or that, “If he is serious about fighting corruption then he must act without delay”. There are also comments such as, “what further evidence does the President need to take action”, “We have lost total confidence in the President”, “The President has proven that all politicians are the same”, and “There is ‘wonkye nni’ going on as political cronies are feasting on the subsidies to enrich their pockets.”

It is not suggested that journalists cannot openly voice their disappointment with failures in governance. However, because journalists comment on everybody’s actions and morals, they must exercise circumspection in their activism. “A good case can be made that journalists have anointed themselves the public’s guardian against moral failures of professionals”, as Stephen Klaidman and Tom L. Beauchamp have postulated in “The Virtuous Journalist”.

Despite whatever reservations that one may have about the way and manner that some media personnel have sought to condemn the government for the corruptible practices in the premix fuel industry, it is imperative that the government takes every measure to thoroughly investigate the claims such that the truth will be established and those found to have cheated the people dealt with in accordance with the law. In our attempts to compel the government to fight corruption, we should not forget about the rule of law and due process.

We return to Klaidman and Beauchamp, whether activism must be subordinated to objectively circulating information as they postulate thus, “From the perspective of moral analysis, it is worth reflecting on questions such as whether a journalist who obtains the confidential diary of a Supreme Court justice that contains information vital to the public interest has a moral right to publish the diary any more than the police have a moral right to search a journalist’s files if they contain vital information.”

Answering the question themselves, the authors of “The Virtuous Journalist” maintain that: “Both the objectives of journalism and the public interest will be served if journalists learn to weigh and balance competing moral considerations in their work, rather than leaving such balancing to the courts or leaving it aside completely as if it were a purely legal matter.”

Journalists must pursue their watchdog and activists roles without veiled threats, innuendo and blackmail and let journalism remain an honourable profession.