ethics 2026 SHUTTERSTOCK EDITORIAL.
broadcasting – probably carried greater respect, says Catherine Happer, a former BBC journalist and now director of the Glasgow University Media Group. It was not a ‘golden age’ as such, stresses Happer, as
complaints of media bias were circulating well before the 20th century came to an end. Nevertheless, the fact that it was harder to check the accuracy of reports in the same way as today meant that, by default, people tended to believe what they were told by the media. “Journalists had access to information that enabled them to explain what was going on,” she says. Fast forward 25 years and the so-called democratisation of the media, including the birth of citizen journalism, has if anything fuelled mistrust. “We are bombarded with news that’s not valuable to people,” says Happer. “We have a phenomenon of news avoidance.” The revolving door of political journalism makes it hard to
know when political figures who work for the media are fulfilling some sort of journalistic function or when they are carrying out the role of MPs. At the same time, there is a growing tendency among reporters to rely on quotes from anonymous sources, often at the behest of politicians and spin doctors who see the media as a way of feeding ideas to an inevitably cynical electorate. Journalists argue that anonymous sources are essential to getting stories – but is the trade-off between reporters and those who frame reports a healthy one? According to Matharu, journalists should be questioning the way they build relationships with contacts and the bargaining that goes with gaining access to so-called exclusives. “It seems so far removed from the public and what they should be informed about,” she adds. Perhaps salvation lies at local and regional
levels, assuming that journalists get out and meet the people they report on. Paul Hutchinson, editor of the Bedford Independent, says it is wrong to tarnish all journalists by accusing them of mimicking the behaviour of ‘bad actors’. He encourages reporters to be curious, question authority, correct mistakes and treat people with respect, even when a story reflects badly on part of the community. “We need to think less about clicks and more about
reputation,” says Hutchinson. “If I have written a story that people find difficult to digest, then I should be able to show that it was accurate so that I can hold my head up high.” Last year, media regulator Impress launched a course in ethical journalism (see box), covering issues such as bias, discrimination and reporting on vulnerable people. Within marginalised communities, says author and
journalist Shelina Janmohamed, people may be less inclined to take a story to the media if they are uncertain about how it will be approached or shaped by journalists. It is, she says, understandable for people to weigh up
whether to trust journalists or shy away from speaking to the media in case a story turns into clickbait. “It’s quite a wild west out there once you give up a story,”
GUY CORBISHLEY / ALAMY STOCK PHOTO
she says. “Communities bring a sense of history when it comes to publications that dealt with them negatively in the past or did not report on them accurately.” The failure of journalists to leave their desks and meet the wider population is also an issue at national level, says Matt Kelly, editor of The New World. He praises The Guardian’s John Harris for travelling around the UK and reporting on people who often feel disenchanted with politicians as well as parts of the media. However, this style of reporting is clearly an exception.
“
Kelly would like to see more non-graduates in journalism, helping the local and national media to be more in tune with the people who appear in stories. Equally, there is a need for journalists to be less dependent
Journalists listen to politicians but won’t go to an economist or medical expert to see if there is any validity in what they’re saying
on stories based upon quotes from politicians and, instead, seek the views of people with more knowledge. “Journalists listen to the opinions of politicians, but they
won’t go to the economist or medical expert to see if there is any validity in what they’re saying,” says Kelly. The more that journalists are guided by an internet-based media model that regards clicks or views as achievement, the harder it will be to regain trust and demonstrate there is a reason for investing time and money in journalism. Is the solution as difficult as appears? According to Happer,
journalists will succeed if they engage with ‘people in everyday situations’ and avoid excessive focus on the same issues. She says: “Journalists should adopt a more relatable style and use everyday narratives that people find interesting.”
theJournalist | 09
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24
