PRINCIPLES OF JOURNALISTIC ETHICS

➢ Journalistic ethics are the principles that guide the behavior of journalists and news
organizations, ensuring fairness, accuracy, and accountability in reporting
➢ Upholding ethical principles ensures that journalists maintain integrity, accuracy,
and fairness in their reporting, thereby fostering public trust and confidence in the
media
Sources of ethical principles
Classical theory
➢ Our moral obligations can be explained by a number of different theories, some of
them overlapping and some completely at odds with one another.
➢ The following theories have implications for journalism and thus apply directly to
professional morality

Aristotle
➢ Aristotle (d. 322 bc) was a Greek philosopher who believed that the function
of human beings was to pursue happiness or Eudaimonia.
➢ ‘Eudaimonia is often translated as happiness, but that can be misleading-It is
sometimes translated as flourishing, to achieve happiness.
➢ Aristotle said, one should live moderately. His theory is known as the ‘golden
mean’.
➢ He argued that one should live neither to excess nor to frugality(stinginess)
but in moderation somewhere between the two.
➢ Aristotle’s theory is extremely useful provided you can decide what is excess and
what is frugality and where the mean lies.
➢ Take example of drinking:-would failure to drink alcohol at all in your best friends
be perceived as being mean-spirited? on the other hand is drinking too much every
night acceptable (it is bad for your health). Most would regard having a drink now
and again as the ‘golden mean’.
➢ Aristotle also believed that one had to learn to be virtuous. Virtue was not
something that was given to all automatically.
➢ It explained why children and animals had not achieved Eudaimonia.
➢ The virtue is of two kinds-intellectual and moral
➢ Intellectual virtue owes its birth and its growth to teaching and learning (therefore
requires experiences and time)
➢ Moral virtue comes as a result of habit …..from this, none of the moral virtues arise in
us by nature, for nothing that exist in nature can form a habit that is contrary to its
nature. For instance, the stone which by nature moves downwards cannot be
habituated to move upwards, not even if one tries to train it by throwing it up ten
thousand times. (Aristotle 1980: 28)
➢ A problem with Aristotle’s theory about the mean, however, is that there are some
virtues that seem to be absolutes.
➢ Truth, for instance, does not seem to be a virtue to be delivered in moderation-
Either one is truthful or one is not.
➢ It is in its failure to address the issue of moral absolutes that Aristotle’s theory is
seen to be deficient.
Religion
➢ Jesus answered, ‘The first is, “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God, the Lord is one; you
shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all
your mind, and with all your strength.”
➢ The second is this, “You shall love your neighbour as yourself.” There is no other
commandment greater than these.’ (Mark 12: 29–31)
➢ Religion is the basis of much moral teaching in the world.
➢ The West has been mainly influenced by Judaeo-Christian ethics
➢ Much of Arab and North African world has seen Islam as a strong and
uncompromising influence.
➢ In India, Hinduism is a powerful religious and social system, which includes the use
of the caste system as the basis of society.
➢ Although theoretically religious moral teaching requires a belief in God to underpin
it, this seems in practice to be unimportant.
➢ In Britain, and indeed most Western countries, Christianity has become so
entrenched within the culture that much moral teaching and thought comes from it
without being based on active belief.
➢ Our fundamental structures of right and wrong, good and evil tend to be based on
the Bible’s teachings.
➢ While its use by Christians is understandable, many people in the West who claim
not to believe in God also use this ethical system to underpin their moral values, if
only because they have absorbed the established cultural moral underpinning
without much thought as to its origins.
➢ Christians accept the entire teaching.
➢ However, those who do not believe in God seem to be able to accept the guidance on
living a good life without the religious belief and to use it as an ethical system.
➢ The main criticism of religion as an ethical system is the need for faith.
➢ What if God is not a loving and moral God?
➢ Using religion, we judge our moral code by our own interpretation of God (be that
personal or cultural) and what he expects of us and not vice versa.
Ethical egoism
➢ Aristotle’s view that people should behave so as to achieve happiness is challenged
by some philosophers as being fundamentally flawed.
➢ To do what is right because it makes us happy is just self-interest, they claim.
Talking about the duty to be truthful, German philosopher Immanuel Kant
(1993: 15) says that ‘To be truthful from duty is, however, quite different from
being truthful from fear of disadvantageous consequences;
➢ In the first case the concept of the action itself contains a law for me, while in the
second I must first look around elsewhere to see what the results for me might be
connected with the action.’
➢ Kant believed that morality is measured by the human will; if our will to do
something is good, then the action is moral.
➢ But to do something because the consequences of not doing it might be damaging to
ourselves is merely self-interest.
 ➢ Writing about the ideas of Plato, H.A. Prichard (1949: 110–11) goes further and
proposes that what Socrates must have meant in ‘introducing the subject of the Idea
of good’ was ‘that in all action what we are striving to bring into existence is – not
what is good but – what is really good for us, or for our own good’.
➢ He goes on to say: ‘If we accept the idea we shall be involved in very awkward
consequences.
➢ For we shall then be forced to allow
o (1) that there is really no such thing as a conscientious action or a
benevolent or a malevolent action,
o (2) that there is really no difference in the motive between the acts of a so
called good man and those of a so-called bad man’ (ibid.: 112).

➢ Ethical egoism suggests that all morality is in reality merely self-interest. If doing
my duty either brings good consequences or simply makes me feel happier because
I have done my duty, then surely my action is indistinguishable from self-interest?
Utilitarianism
➢ Utility, or the Greatest Happiness Principle, holds that actions are right in
proportion as they tend to promote happiness, wrong as they tend to produce the
reverse of happiness. (John Stuart Mill 1991: 137)
➢ Utilitarianism or teleology is also widely accepted in the West as an ethical system.
➢ Jeremy Bentham (1748–1832) and John Stuart Mill (1806–73) are usually
credited as being its most significant proponents.
➢ Utilitarianists believe that an action that produces an excess of beneficial effects
over harmful ones must be the right one.
➢ Certainly this a system that has considerable appeal for journalists.
➢ It justifies, for example, ruining the life of a children’s home superintendent by
exposing him as a child abuser on the basis that it has saved children of the future
from a good deal of misery and brought some small measure of justice to children
(perhaps now adults) who have suffered at his hand in the past.
➢ One problem with utilitarianism is that it depends on who makes the decision. For
instance, one could justify the killing of a homeless down-and-out who has no family
in order that his organs could be donated to several desperately ill patients on the
basis that several people could live with consequent benefits to their families for the
loss of only one life.
➢ But this depends on each unit of happiness being the same, something Friedrich
Nietzsche (1844–1900) condemned ruthlessly.
➢ He believed that some people were more important than others.
➢ Writing about the English utilitarians in less than complimentary term implied that
what is right for one cannot by any means therefore be right for another, that the
demand for one morality for all is detrimental to precisely the higher men, in short
there exists an order of rank between man and man, consequently also between
morality and morality (Nietzsche 1973: 139)
➢ One can argue not only that one person is more important than another but also that
actions have different perceived values. For instance, money given to a beggar has
more significance, in moral terms, when that money comes from a poor student than
from a millionaire.
 ➢ Utilitarianism also does not require any measurement of the motive of the action.
Provided the consequence is an increase in the sum of happiness, an evil act can be
justified.
Kant: the categorical imperative
➢ The German Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) is a highly significant figure in modern
philosophy.
➢ He helped to develop the concept of deontology or duty ethics.
➢ Kant believed that a moral act was one that denied self and followed only
obligation.
➢ Example: If I have promised to meet someone tonight then I am morally obliged to
do that regardless of my inclinations. If, however, I have made no such promise, then
I am free to follow my inclinations.
➢ Kant went on to develop the theory of universalisability.
➢ This determines that:
o One ought never to act in such a way that I could not
o will that my maxim should be a universal law’ (Kant 1990: 18).
➢ The theory of universalizability is a key concept in Immanuel Kant's moral
philosophy, particularly in his categorical imperative.
➢ It suggests that a moral principle or action is valid only if it can be consistently
applied to everyone in similar circumstances without contradiction
➢ Kant identified three different sorts of actions, or imperatives, that are useful in
identifying how moral actions work.
➢ Technical imperatives:-A good journalist must be able to take a quick, accurate
note and many learn shorthand (using recording device) in order to accomplish this.
➢ Hypothetical imperatives:- These are concerned only with prudential action, or
those actions that it would be sensible (but not necessarily moral) to take. If you
were about to be run over by a car, then a hypothetical imperative would be: ‘To
avoid being run over, run fast to your left.’ This would be a prudent action and has
no moral component. On the other hand, it is a duty to maintain one’s life and so
there may well be an element of the final imperative contained here.
➢ Categorical imperatives enjoin action completely without qualification; they deal
solely in absolute duties; duties carried out solely because the will has determined
that these types of actions are moral actions. This deontological approach to morals
means that if one has determined a categorical imperative that one must not lie,
then that is what one should do regardless of the circumstances.
➢ Kant’s theory allows the development of a set of universal laws that are a form of
moral code.
➢ This system can be used by journalists to develop a linked set of categorical
imperatives around professional practice.
➢ This is the basis for codes of conduct or practice.
➢ Kant also believed that one would have to examine the motives of a person to see
whether their behaviour was good or bad.
➢ Their intentions are more important than the act itself, certainly more important
than the consequences in terms of morality.
➢ If they acted solely from a sense of duty and not out of self-interest, then their
action could well be morally justifiable no matter what the consequences.
 ➢ If a journalist were to report something that was not true, despite thorough
checking (perhaps he or she had been lied to), then the journalist could not be
blamed for the consequences, even if these were damaging. He or she would have
been behaving morally in printing the truth as he or she had determined it to be.
➢ However, Kant’s formulation does not handle conflicts of interest well. For example,
if a journalist were asked by police to suppress the story of a kidnap in order to
protect the victim’s life, how could the journalist not publish when it should be a
categorical imperative to publish known information; yet to protect someone’s life
when such protection is required must surely also be a categorical imperative?
➢ Since much of the ethical debate within the media is balancing the right to publish
against some other right, such as a person’s right to privacy, Kant is not always that
helpful, although his theories do allow the building of codes of practice.
➢ Kant believed that every person had equal value and the same right to have their
view taken into consideration.
➢ He thought that the end did not justify the means.
➢ Only by acting from duty could one be said to be acting morally, and the
consequence was not something that could always be foreseen.
➢ It might not, therefore, be appropriate to invade the private life of a celebrity merely
to provide entertainment for the readers of newspapers as that would be to use that
person as a means of entertainment and not as a human being in their own right.
➢ Prichard does not think Kant’s use of the categorical imperative gets us out of the
difficulty of moral decision making, however.
➢ We can’t use the excuse of a ‘moral command’ to force us to act morally: ‘it should be
noted that the summary attempt to elucidate the nature of moral obligation by the
analogy of law … is only mischievous, because it represents our being morally bound
to do some action as if it were our being commanded to do it’ (Prichard 1949: 95).
➢ Others find Kant difficult because of this inflexible and absolute nature of categorical
imperatives.
➢ The NUJ’s code of conduct, for instance, says that a journalist must never reveal the
identity of a confidential source of information. While many journalists stick by this
absolutely, there are some who feel that it is not possible to be so inflexible.
➢ Nick Martin-Clarke, for instance, gave evidence against a former confidential source
who he claimed had confessed a murder to him. What conditions might tempt you
to go back on a promise to a source?
Ross
➢ The philosopher Sir William David Ross (1877–1971) was a deontologist and took
the view that we all have duties of fidelity.
➢ In other words, we are bound by our own words or acts.
➢ If we sign a contract, we are duty-bound not to break it.
➢ If we make a promise, we are bound to keep it.
➢ He also believed in the concept of reparation. If you do ‘wrong’ you are duty bound
to undo the wrong and make good the damage as far as possible.
➢ This duty extends to gratitude. If someone performs a good act for you, you are
under an obligation to return the favour at some point.
➢ Ross believes that this duty of gratitude can extend to friends, relatives, employers
and employees.
 ➢ Ross’s ideas have a direct application to journalism as it can be said that journalists
have a duty of gratitude to readers, advertisers, employers and so on.
Ross also talks about other duties:
 Beneficence – our duty to improve the lot of others.
 Justice – we all have a duty to see that people get what they deserve, whether this is
pleasure or punishment.
 Self-improvement – we have a duty to try to improve our own condition of virtue,
intelligence or happiness.
 Non-injury – our duty not to hurt others or allow them to be hurt if we can prevent
it.
➢ Ross chaired the first Royal Commission into the press in 1947.

Key Journalistic Ethical Principles

Key principles include seeking truth and reporting it, minimizing harm, acting
independently, and being accountable for mistakes
Key Principles of Journalistic Ethics:
Seek Truth and Report It:
This involves fact-checking, avoiding bias, identifying sources, and supporting open
discussion.
Minimize Harm:
Journalists should demonstrate compassion for sources and subjects, protecting privacy
and avoiding unnecessary intrusion.
Act Independently:
This means avoiding conflicts of interest, resisting external pressures, and maintaining
objectivity.
Be Accountable:
Journalists should correct errors, be transparent about their work, and be responsible for
the consequences of their reporting.
Other important principles:
➢ Accuracy: Ensuring the information reported is correct and verifiable.
➢ Objectivity: Presenting information in a neutral and unbiased manner.
➢ Fairness: Considering all sides of a story and presenting information in a balanced
way.
➢ Integrity: Maintaining ethical standards and acting with honesty and transparency.
➢ Independence: Being free from undue influence or control.
➢ Accountability: Taking responsibility for errors and mistakes.
These principles are crucial for building public trust and ensuring that the media fulfills its
role of informing the public accurately and fairly