Dr. Said Zeedani[1]

 

 

John Merrill, in his book Legacy of Wisdom, tries to depict different por­traits of journalists or media people who exhibit different moral qualities. He dis­cusses the different theories and theorists and their points of view related to this issue, from Plato, Socrates and Confucius until Iris Murdoch.

 

The constant and recurring question is as follows: What are the values, virtues or principles (professional, ethical and intellectual ones) that a jour­nalist or a media person should have? And what are those that should di­rect or govern his work?

 

Examples:

 

1.       Plato

The journalist is supposed to sacrifice his individuality for the sake of the group, for its own good and its progress. His real freedom consists of help­ing society in achieving the common good and justice as determined by the philosopher-kings (Plato in his Republic). There is no place in Plato’s Re­public for any other kind of journalist and there is no place for any kind of poetry other than that which praises the virtues of the wise people and the gods, and that leads to the cohesion of a society that is governed by the philosophers who know what virtue and justice are and who aim at promot­ing virtuous and just behavior.

 

2.       Machiavelli

Machiavelli exchanges ethical/non-ethical principles with another kind - effective/non-effective - and brings out the role of exploitative journalism that concentrates upon serving its own interests, its own success, its own freedom, its own supremacy and its own value; since the end justifies the means, the standard of judging, both in the case of the governor or the journalist, is success!

 

3.       Voltaire

Voltaire asked the journalist to be skeptical and not to believe anything without checking and investigating. From this standpoint, he defended the freedom of speech and expression in its widest form and sought the abol­ishment of censorship.

 

Rationality, freedom, skepticism, shying out from the masses and keeping away from religious fanaticism characterize the image of the journalist that was drawn by Voltaire.

 

4.       Kant

Kant confirmed the importance and the priority of sticking to ethical princi­ples. A journalist should act according to ethical principles and should not aim at acting only in his own best interests or those of his group, party or religion. He should consider it his duty to act according to the principles that could become universal laws that are binding on everyone. He advo­cated freedom in its positive sense and not in its negative one.

 

5.       Edmund Barke (the Conservative)

Barke confirmed the importance of the social responsibility of journalism that pushes the journalist to work for and participate in achieving social, political and national stability. This requires respecting the traditions, the inherited values and the public ethics and morals. Following this orienta­tion, the public ethics and morals and the ethical principles become like constraints that restrict the freedom of the journalist and of journalism.

 

6.       John Stuart Mill (the Liberal)

Through the freedom of speech and expression in their widest meaning, man becomes an ethical and progressive human being capable of finding the truth and achieving happiness while advocating pluralism and toler­ance.

 

As to the general good versus individualism, a good journalistic deed like any governmental deed or decision is any deed that leads to or aims at benefiting the public good and thereby results in happiness amongst the largest number of people, even at the expense of others.

 

7.       Iris Murdoch

A journalist should repress his selfish drives and should have an interest in the issue itself but the least possible emotional involvement. The effort should focus on finding the truth without arousing sentiments/emotions. A journalist should not resort to stories that invoke the emotions.

 

 

Media in a Non-Democratic Society

 

1.       Saudi Arabia

In Saudi Arabia, there are official guidelines on how to arrange and priori­tize the official news on the television, which also apply to the press; re­ports about the King followed by news concerning the country followed by news concerning the princes, etc. Even when it comes to issues related to sport, they have special guidelines pertaining to the order in which they should come. It is, therefore, a case of very strict censorship and every journalist being obliged to stick to the rules defined by the rulers. Moreover, in the streets, the morality police are always active. There is also censor­ship of all the newspapers and books that come from outside as well as all local publications. The only source of information is the authorities them­selves; the press and the media say what the authorities want them to say and do what the system wants them to do, and the margin of freedom on this or that issue is determined by the latter. Any alternative source of in­formation is excluded. The system, which is also responsible for financing the media and the press, completely monopolizes all information.

 

A ‘good’ journalist in this case is the one who helps to keep the system stable. He is also the one who sticks to the moral and religious values as defined by the regime.

 

 

2.       The Soviet System

The journalist in this case is a civil servant and should belong to the ruling party and respond to the challenge of anti-Communist propaganda. There is strict censorship by the State, which owns the press. The journalist should be a member in a trade union that is a part of the governing party. The State is also the sole source of information and there is no alternative media or source of information; alternative media is illegal and subject to persecution. Certainly, there is a margin of freedom in the case of some issues that do not interest the system. This does not mean that the jour­nalists are not in harmony with the governing system and with its priorities and objectives. In this case, we can see the role of the media as a dis­seminator of propaganda for serving the existing system and regime.

 

 

3.       Iraq

These days, the situation does not differ greatly from that in the Soviet Un­ion. There is no place for a journalist who criticizes the system or who does not conform to its priorities and its policies.

 

 

Media in a Democratic Society

 

One of the major principles of the democratic process is the enlightened understanding displayed by the citizens who participate in one way or an­other in taking the collective decisions that are binding for the whole soci­ety. This enlightened understanding requires obtaining the information from its different sources: from the governmental source as well as from the other alternative sources. This implies the availability of such alternative information, which is one of the pillars of a democratic system. It is also the duty of the journalist to try and put his finger on the pulse of the people, so that the governor/government knows what the people feel and think about the different issues. If this alternative information is not available, the jour­nalist should look for it. If he does not do this, then he will be, whether he likes it or not, at the mercy of the authority and in a way ‘used’ by the sys­tem for its own purposes because of his laziness.

There are various kinds of decisions that have ethical and religious impli­cations. Amongst these are the following:

 

·       Reporting something that happened without your playing a part in it or being a/the reason for its taking place or its development. Maybe one side or another would make use of you in order to reach the goals that they have in mind. There is a difference between your role in covering an issue or a situation and fabricating an event where your presence was partly responsible for it taking place.

 

·       What are the issues that you write about? That you try to ignore? That you hide? What are the priorities? Why are they important? What criteria do you use? These are decisions that are sometimes forced by the events, but the media usually tends to select and to impose its own priorities. The priorities as the people see them do not always match the priorities as seen by the journalist, and a journalist should do his best to reflect the priorities of the people, rather than his own or those of the group or party to which he be­longs. This requires restraining any bias in order to report a bal­anced story that reflects or expresses to the greatest extent possi­ble the different interests, competing points of view, and positions of the different parties in a struggle. The role of a journalist is to transmit the event, not to make it, color it or deform it, and this de­mands honesty and moral and intellectual integrity.

 

·       Professionalism/Ethics: To what extent should a journalist expose himself to danger in order to have something to report? Nobody would ask him to endanger his life in order to reach the information or its source, but he has to be more courageous than the average person and display a greater readiness to take risks. A journalist is like a soldier in this respect, but it is not his duty to become a hero.

 

To what extent is it permissible for a journalist to intervene in the lives of other people in order to know about the event or its source? The intimate life and relationships of people are not generally a part of the interests of a journalist, and intervening in other people’s lives is much more legitimate if the concerned person is a public figure. If President Clinton cheats on his wife, then this is not an is­sue that concerns him alone. If a Congressman is beating his wife, then it is not an issue that concerns him alone. If a representative of the people has a secret meeting with people from the enemy side, then it is not an issue that concerns him alone. So, the margin of intervention becomes bigger once the person is an official or when he represents the people. The rights of the people, when they are absolute are like trump cards, and the journalist should not violate them without asking for permission.

 

 

 

The Journalist, the Teacher, the Judge

 

A democratic journalist is not a teacher or a judge but he has a lot of things in common with each of them:

 

·       Like the teacher and the judge, he needs protection in order to perform his duty in an acceptable and reasonable way.

·       Like the teacher and the judge, he should be righteous, impartial, objective and trained to do his job properly.

·       Like the teacher and the judge, he is vulnerable to bribery and to seduction and therefore he should be cautious and on the alert.

 

However, contrary to the teacher, a journalist does not deal with a group of people under his tutelage and contrary to a judge, a journalist is not ex­pected to settle disputes between two sides. Moreover, a journalistic con­viction is not binding. Common between all of them is the set of values that they are supposed to have: honesty, righteousness, objectivity, impartiality and the ability to resist bribery or seduction.

 

The teacher, the journalist and the judge play an important role in the lives of the people, and the issues of honesty and moral integrity are very im­portant for each. All three are capable of harming others, which is why they must take extra care to be cautious and sensitive.

 

If the media is the fourth branch of power after the executive, the legislative and the judiciary branches, then this puts a lot of responsibility upon the journalist. The journalist, like the executive branch, can violate somebody’s privacy, his rights or his reputation and therefore he is subject to the rule of law. He can accuse, judge and condemn and that is why he should be ac­countable, controlled and judged in the event that he slanders or injures the reputation of someone, violating his rights. He is like a watchdog that never sleeps and that wakes everybody, but he should always be independent and display as much impartiality as possible.

 

It is very important that sufficient and effective controlling devices be put in place to control the various activities of the different people working in the field of media - the journalist in the field, the editor, analysts, the editorial board, the owners, trade unions, etc. - because the product – the published story or report - is important to the people.

 

 

Case Studies

 

The Issue of the American Hostages in Iran in the Early 1980s:

The press put this issue at the top of its list of priorities and in so doing, put the American President and government in a difficult situation that might have been easier had the media not been there.

 

On the other hand, the American media was very clearly biased against Iran and against Islam, exactly in the same way that the Israeli media is biased towards the interests of the State of Israel and against the other side of the equation.

 

If the journalist is generally biased towards his country and his society, to what extent is this partially legitimate if we take into consideration values such as professional and personal honesty and righteousness and a desire to serve truth and humanity?

 

A journalist cannot - and maybe should not even attempt to - isolate and dissociate himself from his national and ethnic identity. He is the son or daughter of this society, this country and this civilization. There is a certain degree of bias that I think is difficult to get rid of without a special intellec­tual leap, but that cannot be expected from everybody. Nevertheless, it should be an identity that is revisable and subject to criticism.

 

 

·          Edward Said’s Book Covering Islam (1981)

The American media acted as a source of information on Islam. The image of Islam that is drawn by the American media is threatening, and by con­centrating on this image, the media is promoting a prejudiced ideology without any resistance and without reserve. In general, the media coverage is from this point of view harmonious with the authority and this gives it strength and presence.

 

The thing that the media did not succeed in doing is to surmount or reduce the cultural barriers and distances that make knowing ‘others’ possible. The result of this is the victory of the trend that does not make an effort to know and understand Islam, but which wants to impose its own views on Islam. The same applies to the Israeli media coverage of the Palestinian question. The question is as follows: Should we put the mind in the service of the authority or in the service of the truth, the society and basic humane and ethical principles?

 

 

·          The Case of the Bar-On Trial in Israel

This is a case that could have led to the end of the current government and the career of the Israeli Prime Minister. It led to a lot of tension between the executive branch and the media, the intervention of the judicial system and the legal advisor of the Israeli Government. The media in this case was really daring and the media coverage was justified. There was not any slander or fabrication. The correspondent implicated in this case was dar­ing and risked a lot, as a result of which she was threatened, but this did not deter her from continuing the investigation. She did this because the public had the right to know the truth of the matter, but she also fulfilled her duty by doing everything she could to protect her sources of information.

 

·          The Case of the Journalists Maher Al-Alami and Daoud Kuttab

The journalist Maher Al-Alami was punished by being fired from the news­paper for which he worked because he refused to put a photograph of the President on the first page as he felt that to do so was not a professional duty.

 

Daoud Kuttab on the other hand was put in prison for a few days because Educational TV - where he is the director - was broadcasting the delibera­tions that take place in the PLC.

 

In both cases, the battle to have a professional media was complicated by the resistance of the authority and the weakness of the legal system and the journalists’ trade union.

 

 

Conditions for the Flourishing of a Democratic Media and Press

 

A democratic media is one that is committed to the values of democracy and to the principles on which democracy both as a form of government and as a way of life is based.

 

The duty of the media is to provide information and analysis in order to enrich the continuing public debate and dialogue on all levels. This kind of dialogue is necessary for enlightened understanding, which in turn enables the taking of democratic decisions that can be justified, even in front of the opposition.

 

If the saying ‘Knowledge is power’ is correct, the thing that guarantees that limits are never exceeded is professional ethics. The ethics of a given pro­fes­sion are not natural and inborn, but rather acquired through the follow­ing:

 

·       the appropriate and adequate training and values;

·       adequate control;

·       an adequate trade union;

·       an adequate legal system;

·       adequate legislation; and

·       adequate orientation.

 

In the end, the only protection for a journalist, a judge, a teacher or a mem­ber of parliament is the protection provided by a public that is convinced that they serve the values and principles that it wants to preserve - values that are always subject to revision and criticism.