Today's extract from the book After Leveson* is by Phil Harding, former controller of editorial policy at the BBC. Prior to the publication of the Leveson report, he carried out research on behalf of the National Council for the Training of Journalists (NCTJ).
He believes that his findings, seen in the context of the report itself, raise profound questions about how journalistic ethics are taught and that the implications must be faced by every major media organisation.
Almost all the people I interviewed for my survey, which included senior editors and executives from most of the main print and broadcast media groups, felt ashamed about past events.
They thought the revelations had dented their own integrity and that of their profession. Most agreed that there needed to be changes and that ethical issues in journalism had to be given a higher priority.
A minority feared the debate on ethics would lead to the suppression of good journalism and that important stories would go unreported.
In the main, there was a view that ethics do matter, and matter a lot. There was an understanding of the compact between the reader and the journalist, and a keen appreciation of the commercial reality that will follow if that bond of trust is broken.
Mid-career training for senior journalists is necessary
In looking at what is currently on offer in terms of the ethical foundations of journalism there are two career stages. The first is the training of those entering journalism. The start of anyone's career is an important time in forming their professional mind-set.
The second is the provision for mid-career and senior journalists. These are the people who play a crucial part in editorial leadership, yet is a big gap here.
In newspapers, they are the people who give assignments to reporters; with broadcasters, they are responsible for daily output. Yet often they have received little or no training since first joining the organisation.
They are expected to have acquired by osmosis the necessary leadership, management and editorial skills demanded by their changed roles.
Though there is a lot of teaching of regulation at present, there is a lot less teaching of media ethics. The words ethics and regulation often seem to be used inter-changeably, but it is important to understand the difference. Ethics goes much wider and deeper than regulation.
Regulation is what you can and can't do; ethics is what you should do. There may well be a whole series of journalistic circumstances where there are ethical considerations that are not covered by regulation.
Good journalists not only need to know what is right and wrong but they also need to understand why. It is possible to meet the considerations of a regulatory code without having much understanding of the reasoning behind it.
There is a world of difference between teaching the letter of the editors' code of practice - as currently administered by the Press Complaints Commission - and its spirit.
Teaching regulation is different from teaching ethics
It is important that both the editors' code (and whatever ultimately takes its place) and the Ofcom code are integral parts of journalistic training. Entrants to the professions need to know about them.
But teaching regulation without teaching ethics is a bit like preaching the 10 commandments without giving any understanding of religion.
How much is done on ethics in pre-entry training, over and beyond the basics of the regulatory codes, does need to be seriously looked at. Most syllabuses don't give any impression that ethics is a crucial part of training.
There is seldom a separate section on journalistic ethics in the programme of study. Time is clearly a big factor for many providers of training. All acknowledged the importance of ethics but many worried about how they were going to fit anything more into their already crowded timetables.
Everyone agreed that the teaching of journalistic ethics needed to be grounded in, and based on, real-life practical case histories. One example of how this can be done is to be found in some of the current modules on journalism and society and the relationship between the two.
Raising the profile of ethics in training was a key recommendation of the report I submitted to the NCTJ. In November 2012, the organisation announced that a new module on ethics is to be included in its diploma in journalism.
The new module, to be called "practical journalism ethics", will have a one-hour written exam in which students will be judged not on right or wrong answers but on how well they identify the issues. At the same time, the NCTJ diploma's media law module will be revised to include a greater emphasis on regulation.
Editors require 're-education' to change newsroom culture
When I asked senior news executives about the training of senior and mid-career journalists the quotes were quite startling:
"The gap [in ethics] is really with senior editors"… "If there is going to be a prompt change in the culture of journalism in this country then there has to be a re-education of editors"… "Journalism must be one of the only professions or trades where the only place you do any training or development is at the beginning. After that you are just expected to pick this stuff up."
These quotes sum up why I now think mid-career training is crucial. These are the journalists who often have to take the most sensitive ethical decisions. They brief reporters before they leave the office; they watch over and approve the final copy; and they are the people consulted by junior colleagues with their dilemmas.
But most will have received little or no training since they first entered journalism. Most will have received no training for the management job they are now doing.
In recent years, the PCC has taken on an increasingly important role in journalism ethics training, although it is not a role for which it was originally designed, nor is it one for which it was funded.
The PCC has sent a speaker or a trainer to several diploma level training courses in order to introduce them to the essentials of the editors' code.
At a more senior level, the PCC has held seminars to update news organisations on some of its recent adjudications and cases. These often took place in newsrooms, were open to all staff and usually lasted for up to an hour and a half.
When the PCC was in full flow doing workshops they were reaching some 100 newspapers a year, though this activity has dropped off with the uncertainty over the future of regulation.
If there is to be a programme of training and development in the future for senior editors and executives, the successor regulator to the PCC could have a crucial role to play.
Almost all professions now require their practitioners to undertake some form of continuous professional development (CPD) to ensure that everyone is up to date with current developments. Lawyers have to do it, so do doctors. Even plumbers have to be retrained to fit the latest boiler.
Apart from the odd refresher session or PCC seminar, there has been little training for senior staff in most newsrooms. Everyone claims to be too busy for there to be any explicit discussion of the various ethical issues that can arise.
Why journalists must train journalists...
This is a big gap. Most of the people I interviewed thought something should be done about it. Views varied as to what and how.
There are at least two exceptions to this lack of senior training and development. In the wake of the phone-hacking revelations two media groups have launched new initiatives. One started seminars last year for its editors; another is about to launch a series of workshops for its senior journalists.
All these courses are being delivered by senior journalists or ex-journalists. A lot of respondents stressed to me how important it was for the credibility of the message that it was delivered by senior working journalists.
There seems to be a substantial need for a programme of continuous professional development across journalism. This is not a responsibility that can be farmed out to the lawyers or the HR department.
Good, effective and credible ethics training has to be journalistically led. It is important that ethics is seen as something that journalists should worry about and that they should "own" the issues.
Ethics could form a part of a larger package of mid-career development that could include law refreshers as well as new developments in social media and technology, updates on recent compliance and regulatory issues as well as leadership and management modules.
It won't be easy. This is new territory for journalism. Several people made the point to me that the lead needs to come from the top. If the boards of the various media organisations and the editors-in-chief don't take this stuff seriously then no one else will.
If journalism is to regain its credibility and the trust of the public it is essential that it takes ethics very seriously.
*After Leveson? The future for British journalism, edited by John Mair, is published by Abramis. Available at a special Media Guardian price of £15 from richard@arimapublishing.co.uk
Coming soon: Reasons for the regionals to be cheerful, by former local paper editor Tor Clark
No comments:
Post a Comment