Mette Davidsen-Nielsen, fellow at the Journalism School at the University of Southern Denmark, recently promoted the idea of a journalistic oath.
Along with people from the industry, Davidsen-Nielsen is planning to present the oath — which should be comparable to the oath taken by doctors and lawyers — in April 2008.
Her reason for the oath is not to have even more rules and regulations. She underlines that the oath should make journalists strive towards doing his or her best.
Jakob Elkjoer, editor of the Danish union magazine Journalisten, is positive: “At many sites and news channels the demand for fast news is high. …We have a responsibility to make the journalistic expectations match the working conditions.”
Troels Myhlenberg, Head of the Journalism School at the Southern University of Denmark discussed the need for journalists to be better than other sources: “We live in a time when everybody with a computer can become journalist. We would like to sort the wheat from the chaff and believe that it’s worth striving for a special responsibility and consciousness.”
It’s worth noting that both Elkjoer and Myhlenberg focus on challenges specific to the Internet: every blogger is a publisher, and news is faster online than anywhere else. To net users, that’s last century’s news. Personally, I was inches from discarding the whole “oath” idea as something from people who live in an idealistic old-school world: “Let’s research the whole thing thoroughly, and publish some time next week”.
I don’t agree that the Web represents the greatest ethical problem for journalism, but I understand Elkjoer and Myhlenberg’s perspective. Journalists hold a job with great responsibility, constant pressure, and potentially rough consequences for the people we cover. So maybe yet another ethical discussion is worthwhile.
The Danish physician’s oath requires doctors not only to strive to do their best, but specifically mentions (among other things) three elements that apply to journalism:
- Constantly update your professional knowledge.
- Maintain patient confidentiality.
- Treat rich and poor alike.
Thinking about a journalistic oath, the first things that comes to mind are:
- Truth, fairness and presenting readers with all relevant sides of a story.
- Protecting sources.
I’m certain other issues could be considered. For example: Should the oath mention “Striving to inform the public in a democratic society?”
There are plenty more tough issues to navigate, such as sanctions. Personally, I believe this oath shouldn’t include sanctions for violations. Denmark already has laws regulating what you can write, and a Press Council that handles complaints.
The Danish Press Council also has a code of ethics (English translation). I wonder if that’s enough — do we need the oath, or would it be redundant of the code?
What about journalists who are on staff at news organizations (freelancers and citizen journalists)? And might it even offer value to PR practitioners?
It’s not easy writing a journalistic oath that has the moral stamina to survive for centuries. So we need your help in every way.
Which values do you think are most important to journalism? Please comment below.
