Ethics and Self-Regulation in Bulgaria (Seminar Background Paper )

1-2 March, Sofia Background Paper Rights and Responsibilities The European Court of Human Rights has declared that press freedom requires particular protection so as to enable the press "to play its vital role of public watchdog and to impart information and ideas on matters of public interest." The importance of a free and independent media as one of the cornerstones of democracy is recognised throughout Europe but there is an on-going debate about if and where there are limits to press freedom, what rights and responsibilities media professionals should have and whether these rights and responsibilities should be defined by law. Some argue that there should be no legal limits to press freedom while others state that press freedom finds its limits when other fundamental rights are infringed upon. Rights of journalists are sometimes seen as special privileges but the rights granted to journalists are essential for them to carry out their profession and ultimately to provide the public with information enabling them to make informed choices. At the same time journalists have ethical duties. Most European countries define legal limits to press freedom through laws covering defamation, privacy, and secrecy but journalists' ethics are generally not defined by law but are a matter of self-regulation. Ethical standards are at the center of a debate on journalism in Europe. Calls for legal regulation of media conduct have been strongly resisted by the media claiming that this would seriously limit press freedom. Nevertheless, media professionals have to be open for a debate on ethics and how self-regulatory mechanisms can be improved. Media professionals have to realise that in spite of the high ideals prescribed to the media the contemporary journalism scene in Europe reflects a profound public anxiety and accumulated mistrust of media organisations. There is widespread scepticism of journalists' ethics and almost universal resentment of the growing power of media. Journalists and media organisations may disavow responsibility for this prevailing cynicism, but there is little doubt that media professionals, whether they own the newspapers and broadcast media or whether they are employed to gather, edit and disseminate information need to articulate principles of performance and to make themselves ethically accountable in a transparent and public manner. Principles of self-regulation Certain fundamental conditions must exist in order for self-regulation to be effective and desirable. 1. Fundamental principles of press freedom must be respected. Press freedom must be recognised in the constitution, press freedom must be protected both in law and in practice, this includes access to information, decriminalisation of defamation, protection of sources, etc.. 2. Independence of Journalists and the Media must be recognised. If the media is to fulfil the role of "public watchdog" Journalists whether working for the state or private media must be free to report objectively without interference from their employers. Editorial Independence and Clause of Conscience The notion of editorial independence is at the core of anti-censorship regulations aimed to ensure that the media can research, investigate and publish without interference from the state. While all European countries publicly condemn censorship there are countless cases of governments trying to interfere with the publication of information critical of their performance. State-owned media is often subject to direct governmental interference: directors of news are replaced without explanation, journalists are sacked if their programmes do not find the approval of the authorities and an atmosphere of self-censorship prevails. Meanwhile in the private sector, the media owner may use their media to advance their own political and commercial interest. Editorial independence as recognised in Council of Europe declaration on media in a democratic society is thus a right that journalists have to guard jealously. While journalists and publishers stand together in resisting interference from state authorities they do not agree on the principle of independence of the newsroom from the media owner. Publishers state that it is for them to determine the editorial line of their newspaper and that consequently they have very much of a say in what information is published. Journalists, on the other hand, hold that while the editorial line is determined by the owner decisions on what to publish must be subject to their professional code of ethics. In order to strike the balance between different interests of journalists and publishers editorial charters or statutes have been adopted by some newspapers. These special agreements or charters of editorial independence generally spell out the rights of journalists, the rights of editors, and the limitations on the rights of management to influence the journalistic product. The IFJ policy on editorial independence includes minimum standards for editorial statutes: Minimum Standards for Editorial Statutes The editorial staff represents the moral and intellectual capital of the public service broadcasting station; The appointment and dismissal of the editor-in-chief , or equivalent by management must be confirmed by the editorial staff by majority vote; The editorial staff must be consulted on decisions which affect: Ø definition of editorial policy and content of the broadcasting station; Ø personnel policies; Ø transfer/change of tasks of the journalists in the editorial department if the journalist concerned does not agree with the decision; The editorial staff has the right to participate with management in the joint development of editorial codes/guidelines; The editorial staff has the right to be heard on matters of grievances concerning editorial policy; The journalists have the right to refuse an assignment if the assignment breaches the journalists professional ethics as laid down in the union's/ association's code of conduct and/ or the IFJ declaration of principles on the conduct of journalism. The editorial staff have the right to prevent and reject interference of management of third parties on the editorial content; In case of grievances representatives of the editorial staff, the editor in chief and management hold bona fide negotiations. Representatives of the journalists associations and unions should be involved in the negotiations. Existing editorial statutes where they are preferential prevail over the common minimum standards. Point 6 lays down the principle that decisions on editorial content must be taken according to professional standards not according to the interests of the government, powerful politicians or the economic interests of the media owner. If this principle is recognised journalists and editors are in a position to carry out effective self-regulation. Fundamental to journalistic independence is job security and decent working conditions. Until journalists are confident that if their article offends a major advertiser, criticises the authorities, exposes a politician, as long as the journalism stands up to professional scrutiny, that their job will not be threatened, they will never be able to exercise objectivity and editorial independence. Journalists' Ethics: The value and limits of self-regulation Virtually every European country has a code of ethics for journalists adopted by the journalists' organisations or in some cases jointly with the publishers and there are 20 functioning press councils in Europe . But there is little agreement on how and by whom these codes should be enforced. Many countries of Central and Eastern Europe have looked at existing press councils and opted for one of the models. One of the models often cited in this respect in the Swedish Press Ombudsman system. The Swedish ombudsman is a position set up by law, a body to whom parties can complain and whose powers includes those of ordering corrections, apologies and retractions, awarding damages and imposing fines. The Swedish model has a powerful attraction. It provides a corrective function by arranging for appropriate retractions of replies or reprimands to be published, usually within a few days. The system is free to complainants and is fully supported by the press. But it would be wrong to assume that the Swedish model is the answer for other countries. The Swedish Press Ombudsman was appointed against a background of established freedoms including a wide-ranging Freedom of Information Act, which encouraged the Swedish press to enter into a binding system of self-regulation because it enjoyed freedoms which the Bulgarian Press does not possess. The Swedish system is effective because it has the following characteristics: A legal framework and legal practice guaranteeing media freedom; Consultation and full involvement of the organisations representing media professionals in the establishment of the press council; A common code of conduct supported by journalists, editors and publishers. This is what makes the model an effective and an acceptable system of self-regulation. But the simple transfer of this model to countries where these three conditions are not in place, would produce adverse results. A statutory body could be misused for government control of the media. If the media is not consulted it will not accept the rulings of the ombudsman. Methods of self-regulation: the Media Observatory What do we have to do in countries where fundamental principles of press freedom are not established? Journalists still have to enter into a debate about ethics. Accountability of the media to the readers, viewers and listeners is key to give credibility to media and the public the feeling they can trust the information they receive. There are three types of self-regulation of media: Ethics committees within the journalists' organisations; A voluntary press council set up by the media professionals; A statutory press council It is important that codes of ethics and self-regulatory bodies are developed by the media professionals themselves. In countries with more than one journalists' organization, such as Bulgaria, agreeing a joint code of ethics and the establishment of a joint ethics council would be the first step. However, the ethics committees or press councils can do more than monitor the performance of the press. The Media Observatory, foreseen in this project, is based on the premise that media freedom, independent journalism and high ethical standards are interlinked. It will therefore not only monitor whether media performs in line with the code of conduct but also monitor and denounce attacks on press freedom and the independence of journalists. The public will be able to lodge complaints with the committee and journalists can raise concerns over undue influence on editorial content and the committee protests if media freedom is violated. The media observatory can create effective and acceptable methods of self-regulation. A type of self-regulation that protects and promotes media freedom and independent journalism and allows for journalists to resolve ethical dilemmas according to their conscience and professional standards of journalism.