'Media ethics for press freedom: Quid pro quo?'

Howard Hudson is the editor of the European Journalism Centre, an independent non-profit media institute based in Maastricht, The Netherlands.

Journalists killed, assaulted, imprisoned, intimidated, and threatened with gagging: more bad news from China, Iraq or Zimbabwe? No, these are recent cases from southern Europe in Reporters Without Borders' (RSF) Press Freedom Index 2010.

While four Nordic countries share first place, Greece and Bulgaria tie for 70th and Turkey drops to a pathetic 138th. This year even Iraq and Egypt rank higher than Turkey!

British journalists might say: "So what? They're a long way away, plus we've got enough of our own problems!" Well, in response, Italy is not that far away, Bulgaria is already an EU member, and Turkey is set to join within a decade.

Meanwhile, the UK and US barely make the top 20, just above those bastions of press freedom: Jamaica and Ghana. Can we afford to be complacent? Why is no one pushing or co-ordinating a response?

Actually, some people are - but mainly on 'the continent'. In summer 2009, 48 editors launched the European Charter on Press Freedom, supported by the European Commission. The 10 articles state among other things that media should be free of persecution, repression and of political interference by government. That's all very well, but it's not legally binding.

Press freedom with teeth…

Under the current system, 'media predators' - e.g. in Italy - are free to ignore the need for independent journalism or to defend journalists from physical attack. Unwritten rules suit those who like to break them. Sometimes that includes journalists - who appeal to a 'hierarchy of laws' when working in the public interest, e.g. to investigate corruption.

But we could have it both ways if we sought formal, international protections in return for adhering to a code of ethics. If we agreed to work responsibly, we could better claim the rights and protections we need to do our jobs properly and safely. It's already the case in Canada for both journalists and bloggers - so long as they can prove due diligence.

In turn, these protections would be easier to claim with a recognised, international code. Back in May, the European Journalism Centre had the idea of combining media ethics with press freedom. A bit like bookends.

So why now? First, our industry has changed so much through globalisation and the internet, there is clearly a need to 'reset'. Second, the European Parliament called for a new media code of ethics in September 2010 - so there is already political will. And third, journalists and bloggers are still getting murdered, often in warzones but also by security services and organised crime gangs.

To date, RSF lists 35 journalists killed, 154 imprisoned, with a further 112 'netizens' (bloggers) imprisoned in 2010. Most are outside Europe, but says RSF: "It is disturbing to see several European Union member countries continuing to fall in the index. If it does not pull itself together, the European Union risks losing its position as world leader in respect for human rights. And if that were to happen, how could it be convincing when it asked authoritarian regimes to make improvements?"

…in exchange for a code of media ethics

So why not seek formal protections in return for an agreed code of ethics? You make the European Charter on Press Freedom legally binding and we'll commit to a European Code of Media Ethics? We could start in Europe and then fan out to the surrounding countries - where there's barely any press freedom and where they badly need an example to follow.

It's a massive job, but at the EJC we've started the ball rolling with a series of articles and a community page linked to our code of ethics. We're now calling for journalists and bloggers to help shape our code with real world case studies.

What's the alternative? Week after week journalists and bloggers meet for 'spirited debates', which almost always lead to 'no firm conclusions'. We miss the wood for the trees, demeaning bloggers or calling them the enemy - instead of the criminals who attack or intimidate fellow reporters on the fringes of Europe (where dissident 'journalists' can only really work as bloggers anyway).

Besides, does Britain have such a cast-iron system? No, says LSE's Damian Tambini: "If privileges are abused then the journalistic profession as a whole can expect regulation, as we are likely to see in relation to phone hacking."

We need to firm up our rights and responsibilities in the new media landscape. Of course, we need to be careful and do it ourselves. But ultimately, self-regulation as a quid pro quo for international legal protections would be better for all of us - journalists and bloggers alike - than regulations imposed with nothing in return.

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).