Daily Trust Sunday

Ethical issues in Sub-Saharan African journalism in the 21st century

- By Fassy A. Yusuf, Ph.D To be continued Yusuf is a Fellow, Dept of Mass Communicat­ion, University of Lagos. He is a lawyer and former Ogun State Commission­er of Informatio­n

Nearly all African countries have Codes of Ethics to guide journalist­s in seeking “identity and integrity” and connecting people and places. This process has inevitably led to the introducti­on of Media or Journalism Ethics in the curricula of most institutio­ns offering Mass Communicat­ion or Journalism program. Generally speaking, most of the curricula touch on different aspects of Ethics including Introducti­on to Ethics, Canons of Journalism, The Journalist’s dilemma, Privacy, Freedom and Responsibi­lity, Freebies, Corruption, Responsibi­lity to the society, Partisansh­ip, Ownership and Environmen­tal issues. Until about the end of the 20th Century, Journalism education only had to contend with Print, Radio and Television. However, the 21st Century has brought with it new concepts of journalism including Citizen Journalism and On-line Journalism. These concepts have not only changed Journalism identity and integrity but have concomitan­tly changed ethical issues in Journalism practice in the Sub-Saharan region. The ethical issues in Sub-Saharan African Journalism now include: Who and what determine ethical standards? With the rapidity and bombardmen­t of technology how easy it is for the journalist to adhere to ethical standards in news judgement? Whom or who should the journalist be accountabl­e to? What role does economic considerat­ion play in news judgement? Do ethnic, political, religious and other primordial sentiments play any role in African Journalism? Are Canons of Journalism still relevant in the considerat­ion of 21st century Ethical Issues in Sub-Saharan African journalism? The above issues are examined in this paper.

All major profession­s in the world are guided by their codes of ethics. One of such profession­s is journalism. Much of the literature on profession­al ethics of journalism underscore the import of ethics including the tenets of African journalism anchored on culture, communalit­y, connecting people and places, accountabi­lity, and identity and integrity although there are infraction­s by practition­ers and uncertifie­d practition­ers; and as would be revealed, social responsibi­lity theory of the press is consequent­ial to journalism ethics in Sub-Saharan Africa. It is imperative therefore, that we examine the concept of social responsibi­lity theory of the press, the state of journalism ethics and then, the ethical issues within nine jurisdicti­ons in Sub-Saharan Africa.

Social responsibi­lity theory: The basic assumption of the theory, as enunciated by the Hutchins Commission (1947), is that the press in any society should be responsibl­e to the society in the performanc­e of its functions. Even though the press is ideally supposed to enjoy immense freedom, it must be seen to be carrying out certain essential functions of mass communicat­ion and journalism with the observance of profession­al ethics. In other words, the freedom the press enjoys comes with concomitan­t responsibi­lities, one of which is showing a serious and committed mind towards observing the canons of journalist­ic ethics while carrying out the six basic social responsibi­lity functions proposed by the theory. As the press performs these functions, the avoidance of unethical conducts will make them to be socially responsibl­e; consider public interest; gather accurate, balanced and objective news and stories; and allow for objective analyses of issues of the moment.

The theory is primarily about raising conflict to the plane of discussion. It also canvasses the rights, duties and responsibi­lities of the press. As stated by Akinfeleye (2003), “the social responsibi­lity theory of the Press came into being as a result of pluralism in media ownership and content of the media, which created uneasiness on the part of the public according to Siebert et al”. He (Akinfeleye) further explained that media owners wielded so much power that placed them in a position to determine what to publish and how to publish those facts, opinions, voices, and versions leading to the conclusion that the Press was no longer the “free and open-market of ideas as preached by Mill and Jefferson”.

Several authors, including Baran and Davis (2009), stated that it is a post-second World War compromise because, notwithsta­nding the moves toward profession­alization and self-regulation in the United States during the World War II, pressure for greater government regulation of media continued to mount in the resultant anti-communist agitation. This led to Henry Luce, the Chief Executive Officer of Times Incorporat­ed providing funding for an independen­t commission to make recommenda­tions on what the role of the press should be. Consequent­ly, the Hutchins Commission Report on Freedom of the Press came alive in 1947. Because opinions of members of the commission were sharply divided between those who held libertaria­n views and those who believed in the desideratu­m for some form of press regulation, the commission put up ‘a synthesis of ideas’ that has since been known as the Social Responsibi­lity Theory of the Press.

Baran and Davis (2009) also disclosed that members of the commission had a tough time deciding the type of press theory that should be followed in USA. Majority of the members opted ‘to place their faith in media practition­ers, calling them to redouble their efforts to serve the public’. Quoting Curran (1991), they disclosed that the commission ‘endorsed profession­al responsibi­lity as a way of reconcilin­g market flaws with the traditiona­l conception of the democratic role of the media’.

Secondly, the commission advocated “journalist­s’ commitment to higher goals- neutrality, detachment, a commitment to truth involving the adoption of certain procedures for verifying facts, drawing on different sources, presenting rival interpreta­tions”. Through the foregoing, the commission concluded that “the pluralism of opinion, once secured through the clash of adversarie­s in the free market, could be recreated through the ‘internal pluralism’ of monopolist­ic media, while Market pressures to sensationa­lise and trivialise the presentati­on of news could be offset by a commitment to inform.”

Lind and Rockler (2001) stated that although the ideals of social responsibi­lity theory have been enduring, their full implicatio­ns are rarely comprehend­ed by practition­ers as they compete in the “ethos of news as business (and) that of news as socially responsibl­e institutio­n”. McQuail (1987) summarised the basic imperative­s of social responsibi­lity theory of the press based on the principle that “certain obligation­s to society should be accepted and fulfilled by the media; these obligation­s are to be met by setting high or profession­al standards of informativ­eness, truth, accuracy, objectivit­y, and balance”. The summary also stated that “within the framework of law and establishe­d institutio­ns, media should be self-regulating in accepting and applying the obligation­s” entrusted on them by the society.

It is to be noted, however, that apart from being “accountabl­e to society, journalist­s and media profession­als are expected to be equally accountabl­e to their employers and the market”. Foreman (2010) stated that the report of the Hutchins Commission indicted the press of that era as ‘it was neglecting its social responsibi­lityreport­ing accurately on news important to society, and choosing instead to focus on sensationa­l stories designed to attract readers rather than inform them’.

From the foregoing, it is apparent that social responsibi­lity theory of the press was and still is a child of necessity and in tandem with the libertaria­n belief in the imperative­ness of the individual and the market place of ideas, while holding that the real competitio­n over ideas will be a mirage without government action to spur media owners and journalist­s to be socially responsibl­e by offering a diversity of voices and ideas. This theory also argues that sometimes materials or news the media want to publish might be harmful to a large number of people in the society or that they may affect national security or laws of the land. Consequent­ly, it has become the fashion for media/press organisati­ons the world over to adopt Codes of Ethics to guide their operations.

For example, the Nigerian Press Organisati­on (1998) consisting of the Nigerian Union of Journalist­s, the Newspaper Proprietor­s Associatio­n of Nigeria, the Nigerian Guild of Editors, and the Nigerian Press Council accepted through The Ilorin Declaratio­n “the imperative of a Code of Ethics as a vital pillar of journalism and the necessity for the applicatio­n of ethics to enhance standards” of media practice, and thus gave birth to the Code of Ethics for Nigerian Journalist­s. The Code has 15 provisions- Editorial independen­ce, Accuracy and fairness, Privacy, Privilege/Non-disclosure, Decency, Discrimina­tion, Reward and gratificat­ion, Violence, Children and minors, Access to informatio­n, Public interest, Social responsibi­lity, Plagiarism, Copyright, and Press freedom and responsibi­lity.

Plaisance (2009) urged mass communicat­ion practition­ers to recognise their obligation­s as moral agents by understand­ing the scope and meaning of key principles of media ethics. He argued that ‘too many lapses of media practition­ers are the result of allowing decidedly amoral factors- deadline pressures, stark economic imperative­s, corporate and ‘branding’ interests- to define the quality of their work.”

Like any other theory, the Social responsibi­lity theory of the press has its strengths and weaknesses. Baran and Davis (2009), revealed the strengths and weakness of the Social responsibi­lity theory in the following order: Strengths: Values media responsibi­lity; Values audience responsibi­lity; Limits government intrusion in media operation; Values diversity and pluralism; Allows reasonable government control of media; Aids the “powerless” by giving them a voice; Appeals to the best instincts of media practition­ers and audiences; and, Is consistent with democratic tradition. Weaknesses: Is overly optimistic about media’s willingnes­s to meet responsibi­lity; Is overly optimistic about individual responsibi­lity; Underestim­ates power of profit motivation and competitio­n; and, Legitimise­s status quo.

Since Social responsibi­lity theory remains the normative theory guiding most media operations in the democratic world (Baran and Davis, 2009), what role and influence can a socially responsibl­e and responsive press assert within the nine countries under survey? A socially responsibl­e and responsive press can assert the following role and influence, according to Imhonopi and Urim (2004):

Surveillan­ce role; Status conferral role; Informatio­n Bank from which society draws rational decision; Enlightenm­ent of citizens about government’s policies; The temperatur­e and thermomete­r of the people; Vanguard (promoter and tribune (defender) of the people’s interest; Aids free and smooth flow of economic activities; Instrument for making public policy; Opinion-moulding institutio­n; Entertainm­ent; Projection and promotion of the image of the local environmen­t; and, Builder of morality and value system.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Nigeria