Major World Journalist Organizations Reject Government-imposed or Suggested Codes of Conduct, Guidelines, or Even New Laws Restricting Freedom of the Press In Response To The Danish Cartoons, But They Agree That Journalists Should Not Create Unnecessary Tension By Promoting Hatred Or Inciting Violence.
Philip Stone February 23, 2006
Major news organizations including the International Federation of Jounalists (IFJ) and several all-news channels have held separate meetings in the past days to discuss the Danish cartoon controversy and to determine what has been learned and what needs to be done to prevent similar distress in the future.
 The starting point was the absolute right of the freedom of the press and expression. The question was how that right is practiced when it comes, in a cultural or religious setting, to upsetting a great many people globally. What has made the meetings meaningful is that Arab journalists have been full participants and on a journalist-to-journalist basis there seems to be a fair meeting of minds.
|
A Danish reader took ftm to task this past week for saying that Jyllands-Posten had apologized for printing the 12 cartoons that caused riots throughout the world by protesting Muslims. There was no apology for printing the cartoons, we were told, but rather the apology was if the cartoons caused any offense.
US media, with just a few exceptions, did not show the Danish cartoons exercising their freedom of the press responsibility, but a Google image search found the most offensive of those cartoons on the San Francisco Chronicle web site, but not in the newspaper. In the UK not one newspaper printed the cartoons but that didn’t stop some national newspapers from offering direct links to sites outside the country where the cartoons could be viewed.
When European newspapers reprinted those 12 Danish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad there is no question they had the freedom of the press to do so, but was it responsible journalism to offend Muslims in such a way? And in making that decision does one take into account the rioting, the burnings, the boycotts the world over? In other words should “fear” of what might happen preclude publication?
We in the West take for granted our freedom of speech and the press. We also understand that with those rights comes a social responsibility and the media, and the public, constantly question just where the line is drawn on what is acceptable. How three separate incidents were handled this past week in Europe shows how far we have come, and how far we have yet to go.
A broadcasting law recently taking force in the Spanish Catalan region is raising tensions – and considerable naughty language - as the government controlled regulator takes on Cadena COPE.
Amsterdam’s TV News Xchange: Highlights of the Various Sessions Many of Which Drew Many Sparks as Attendees Took Issue Wirth What They Were Hearing With Is Paris Burning And Reporting Islam Taking Front Row.
The EU and its member States regularly congratulate themselves for promoting ethnic and cultural diversity in media. Theo Van Gogh’s murder in an Amsterdam street sets a stark backdrop for a tableau vivant in which nobody waits in the wings.
|
Journalists are concerned because EU officials have suggested that codes of conduct might be needed. Journalists say how they conduct their trade is none of the government’s business.
Because of its importance, we print the IFJ resolution in full:
The meeting of media professionals called by the International Federation of Journalists, held in Brussels, on February 15th 2006, has noted the controversy regarding the publication of cartoons in Denmark and other countries which have caused regrettable offence to many people in Europe and around the world.
1. While all professional groups understand well the need to consider cultural and religious feelings at all times in the exercise of journalism, they are united in their condemnation of the violence, intimidation, deaths and death threats that have accompanied some protests over the publication and republication of these cartoons.
2. The meeting reaffirms, without compromise, that freedom of expression and opinion is a fundamental and core value of democracy and human rights that should not be subject to any undue restraint.
3. The meeting believes that all media, on all sides, must act professionally in dealing with religious and cultural issues and rights of minorities, and should not do anything that would create unnecessary tension by promoting hatred or inciting violence.
4. At the same time, the meeting is unanimous in the view that the ethical and professional duties of journalism are the sole responsibility of journalists and other media professional in the free exercise of their work.
5. The meeting does not accept that new supranational codes of conduct or other guidelines or new laws are needed. Existing voluntary codes, some of them in force for more than 50 years, serve journalism well.
6. The meeting welcomes efforts to promote dialogue and to raise awareness among journalists and media on all sides about the need for ethical and responsible practice.
7. The participants agree to promote co-operation within and between professional groups and welcomes initiatives to promote dialogue among journalists from different cultural traditions.
8. The aim of such co-operation should be to strengthen media quality and to raise awareness among journalists of the need for informed reporting in context when dealing with inter-cultural and religious matters.
Finally, the participants agree to co-ordinate their efforts in the coming months and request the IFJ to call further meetings of media professional groups to discuss these issues at both regional and international level; they also call on representative media professional groups from the Arab and Muslim world to participate in this process.
The statement was issued on behalf of the Association of Commercial Television (ACT), the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), the European Federation of Magazine Publishers (FAEP), the International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) and the International Press Institute (IPI).
Other non-signatory participants at the meeting included representatives of the Arab Reporters for Investigative Journalism, the Danish Union of Journalists European, the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe (ECRI), the European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia (EUMC), the European Newspaper Publishers' Association (ENPA), International Media Support, the World Editors Forum of World Association of Newspapers, UNESCO and leading international correspondents from the Brussels press corps.
A separate meeting was held on the sidelines of the Torino Olympics and involved representatives of all-news TV networks BBC, CNN, RaiNews24, Sky, Al Jazeera, NTV Turk, and MEDI1 Sat.
According to a report by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) the Mediterranean channels felt that the cartoon clashes were not a clash of civilizations but “more a problem of cultures and training given to western journalists, who would not have been capable of gauging the consequences.”
The meeting agreed to hold similar meetings in the future to maintain the contacts between all-news channels of different cultures, and that they should communicate with one another whenever a major crisis occurs.
The group also agreed to draw up a code of conduct for all-news channels that would help news desks handle delicate subjects in the age of globalization and reduce the risk of misunderstanding or unexpected side-effects outside the zones of the world they serve.
All of which goes to show there are times when cartoons are no laughing matter!
ftm Follow Up & Comments
| 