MAI on the Professional Level (Part one)Press Councils, Ombudsmen and Letters to the Editor

By Salvador Alsius, Marcel Mauri & Ruth Rodríguez Martínez

Session 5

Photo: imago/ecomedia/robert fishman

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 2

The media accountability instruments on the professional level are these five

Research

NGOs

Press councils

Codes of

ethics

Media journalism

Ombuds-men

Journalist blogs

Entertain-ment formats

Media criticism in social networks

Citizen blogs low degree of

institutionalization

journalism-external

journalism-internal

high degree of institutionalization

Training

Letters to the

editorOnline commen

ts

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 3

Press councils: what are they?Press councils are collegiate bodies that oversee self-regulatory compliance with the ethical principles of journalism.

Generally these agencies take as a reference those codes of ethics that they help to draft or update.

Usually, these councils receive complaints from users of the media and, after making the necessary consultation with the companies involved, issue a verdict.

Since they are not legitimized by universal suffrage and stand outside the judicial system, they often have no sanctioning capacity but merely a moral authority. DESPITE ITS NAME, THE "PRESS COUNCILS"

HANDLE COMPLAINTS RELATING TO ALL KINDS

OF MEDIA, INCLUDING AUDIO-VISUAL AND,

MORE RECENTLY, THE "ONLINE“MEDIA

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 4

Aims of Press Councils

The main aim:To promote freedom of expression and quality of information.

But also (probably less altruistic):To prevent the government's desire to exercise greater regulation.

Margaret Thatcher to the newspapers editors in the

80s

“ If you do not regulate yourself, we will regulate you“

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 5

Who supports them? Who compose these councils?The first European Councils appeared in Britain and Germany in the 1950s. They were created by associations of journalists and editors to stop government intentions to establish a regulatory authority.

The "Press Complaints Comission" was generated from British media companies and it excluded journalists’ associations, which were part of the old "Press Council”. Press councils can be bi- or tripartite, involving representatives of media companies, publishers’ associations, journalists' organizations, and in some cases (like Sweden, Denmark, and the UK, amongst others) also members of the public.

Press Councils

Publishers’ associations

Media companies‘

representatives

Journalists' Organizations

Members of the public

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 6

Where can we find Press Councils?In general, these organisms are national, but in some cases they have a regional presence, as in Flanders and Catalonia.In general, it is desirable that councils have jurisdiction within a big geographical territory, because the bigger they are, the more strength and independence they have. But it is also important that people can identify with the councils. Therefore, they can also have more prestige or recognition if they have a regional scope. Especially if they pay attention to a specific media system, culture or language.

France, Italy and Spain: no press

council on national level

UK: press council on national level

Germany, Estonia, Finland,

Netherlands, Austria,

Switzerland: press council on

national level

Poland and Romania: no press

council on national level

The Alliance of Independent Press Councils of Europe (AIPCE) coordinates the European press councils. It’s a network of independent content regulators for both press and broadcast media. Its annual conferences provide a forum for media and press council representatives to discuss topical issues, to exchange ideas, and to offer and receive advice. http://www.aipce.net/

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 7

Brief History of Press Councils

1953

The Schweizer Presserat was

created in Switzerland (Swiss

Press Council)http://www.presserat.ch/

England was the precursor with the creation of the General Council of the Press in 1953. That organism became the Press Council in 1963 and in 1991 adopted the current name of the Press Complaints Comission (PCC) http://www.pcc.org.uk/

Germany created the Deutscher

Presserat http://www.presserat.info/

The Raad voor Journalistiek was created in The Netherlands

http://www.rvdj.nl/ In Austria the

Östereichischer Presserat

http://www.presserat.at/

, was dissolved in 2002 and created

again in 2010

The Julkisen Sanan Neuvosto appeared in Finland (Council for Mass Media) http://www.jsn.fi/

In Poland the Rada Etyk

Mediow (REM) was created (Council of

Media Ethics) (http://www.radaetykimediow.pl/

) A press law from 1984 envisaged

such a council, but it was not

put into practice.

1956

1960

1977

2008

1968

2009

In Romania a regional council called Moldavian

Press Council appeared (

http://consiliuldepresa.md

). There is no national and independent

council. However there was a

Council of Honour within the old

Romanian Press Club.

1961

The Austrian Press Council was created. After several problems, it

desappeared in 2002. In 2010 a

new Press Council was established

http://www.presserat.at/

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 8

What comes before the Code or the Council?It depends!

In some cases, councils take as a reference those journalistic ethics codes that have been established

previously.

In other cases, the council's missions is to draft a new code, or updating an existing one.

In any case, these two instruments, codes and councils, are closely linked. A press council takes

the code as its "Bible”.

Codes Press Councils

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 9

Press Councils Activity: Number of complaints (per year)

Press Complaints Comission (UK)

4.000 (2009) - 80% are not taken into consideration

Deutscher Presserat (Germany)

1269 per year

Raad voor Journalistiek (The Netherlands)

90 per year

Schweizer Presserat (Switzerland)

70 per year

Julkisen Sanan Neuvosto (Finland)

Around 70 per year

Source: Eberwein, T., Fengler, S, Lauk, E and Leppik-Bork, Tanja, eds. (2011):.Mapping Media Accountability - in Europe and Beyond. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 10

How are they financed?

In general it is preferable that the councildoes not receive government subsidies and is not an

institutionlinked to political power

to maintain its independence

When they are supported by publishers' associations media companies finance the councils

When they are supported by journalists’ associations the

economic difficulties are usually higher.

Exceptions: the

German and the

Austrian council

receive a state grant

of 150,000 euros per year.

The financial basis is diverse.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 11

Weak points

• Inability to impose sanctions• Difficulties in getting members to agree on criteria• Companies' unwillingness to recognize the moral authority of the verdicts• Lack of knowledge of its existence by the public• Insufficient funding

Some of the European press councils have experienced serious crises, often for the following reasons:

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 12

The Journalists’ opinion

From the neoliberal perspective, it is considered that nothing except the law should limit the freedom of information. Press councils are seen as potential censors.

Other journalists, supporters of professional self-regulation, understand that the council is, next to the codes, a very valuable instrument to serve as a bridge between the media and the public as well as to reinforce the idea that information is a democratic tool.

Not all journalists believe that press councils are desirable

On average European journalists consider the impact of press councils on their behavior to be mediocre at best (total mean value of

2.96 in a scale of 1-5). The highest value appears in Finland (4.09) and the lowest in Poland

(2.25) (MediaAcT survey 2012)

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 13

The Press Council and the Leveson Inquiry

http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/

The tension between regulation and self-regulation has been in the limelight recently in United Kingdom following the recommendation made by Lord Judge Leveson, who investigated the wiretapping case against "News of the World".The role of the Press Complaints Commission has been discussed again after the judge's recommendation that a new press law needs to be created.However, PM Cameron has rejected this possibility and has declared in favour of promoting a new self-regulatory council reform.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 14

Ombudsman: one of the self-regulation instruments

The ombudsman is one of the regulatory mechanisms that media can use to perform their work with high ethical standards.

It is one of the instruments that are promoted within the media companies. The ombdusman figure does not determines if a media company is ethical or not, but can contribute to it.

In general, the media (especially newspapers)

that have incorporated this figure are often

among the most prestigious in their

respective countries.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 15

Ombudsman Origin

1809

First ombudsman in Finland The first ombudsman was

created in 1809 in Sweden as part of a liberal constitution. The name of the ombudsman literally means "the man who does the paperwork". Its mission was to ensure compliance with laws and enforce their obligations to officials of the king, for the benefit of citizens.

For more than one century it only existed

in Sweden

1953

Second half of 20th century

1919

In the second half of the 20th century this figure spread to many democratic states. In each country it is called differently, e.g. Parliamentary Commissioner for the Administration in Britain (1967), Médiateur de la République in France (1973) or Ombudsman in Spain.

The ”audience editor" was introduced to the media as a replica of the official figure "ombudsman" or acting ombudsman in Scandinavian countries for over a century.

First ombudsman in Denmark

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 16

The ombudsman in the media

The first newspaper ombudsman appeared in Sweden in 1986 as part of the press council.

The first ombudsman of a particular newspaper was John Herchenroeder in the United States. He worked for two newspapers in Louisville, Kentucky, and he had two types of tasks: receiving complaints and providing answers to explain the crisis of newspapers.

In the media context the ombudsman has kept its Swedish original name and has been known as the defender of the readers (or listeners, or

viewers) and the attorney or representative of public media.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 17

Ombudsman functions

Functions that refer to the society

Functions that refer to professional excellence

Functions that refer to the news product

Functions that refer to business excellence

The basic function (or at least the most cited) is to address complaints from the readers, listeners or viewers.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 18

 a) Functions that refer to the news product- Deficits in production (in the case of the press: incomplete

copies,… in the case of audiovisual media: defaults of schedules, lack of sound or image quality, etc..)

- Deficits in design (in the case of the press: organization or distribution launched in press format,... in the case of audiovisual media: scenario proposals, etc..)

- Decisions about the editorial line- Decisions about the inclusion or exclusion of topics or

subjects- Offensive beliefs, good taste, sensitivity, etc.. - Decisions about the language used- Deficits in language (in syntax, spelling, etc..).

The ombudsman’s main role is to control the product quality.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 19

 b) Functions that refer to professional excellence- Regarding the professional ethics and codes of conduct of

journalism (with the understanding that you can assimilate the concept of ethics and quality in line with what is usually called "best practices”).

- Prevention of corporatism.- Promotion of self-criticism.- Improving the public image of the professional.

 c) Functions that refer to business excellence- Promoting internal dialogue.- Revitalization.- Knowledge of the public.- Public Relations.- Help to understand and face the crisis in the media.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 20

 d) Functions that refer to society

- Agenda Production.- Defense of the public's right to information.- Education on media activity.- Consolidation of self-regulation.

 

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 21

Main defining features

They receive, investigate and respond to public complaints.

The ombudsman role is not regulated by law. His powers and forms of exercise are diverse. However, he can take a number of common features which are quite frequent. Among these

features we can find the following:

They have no power to impose sanctions.

They are not usually involved in the editorial line.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 22

Defining features for discussion

Internal or external character of the ombudsman

A number of other features that determine the profile of the ombudsman have a variable form

Time he/she serves in office

Regular column/broadcast or not

Independence of judgment from the Ombudsman

Hierarchy within the newsroom

Proximity/ distance to

the newsroom

Warranty protecting his normative function

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 23

The current situation in EuropePoland and Italy: the

concept of the Ombudsman does not

exist

France, The Netherlands, Spain :

there have been various ombudsmen

Switzerland: there are mandatories in the

audiovisual media but they have little

impact. They also exist in some newspapers

Germany: some attempts in the 70s. Now there are again

some attempts

This instrument, so far, has been more common in the US (Starck, 2010) than in Europe, and is also quite common in some Latin American countries. Most ombudsmen around the world are members of a global organization, the ONO. http://newsombudsmen.org/

Rumania and Estonia: Ombudsmen don’t exist in commercial media. There are similar figures in public radio and

television

Austria: in 2007 the editors association

created the ‘Leseranwaltschaft’

with little impact

UK: in the 90s almost all national

newspapers had an ombudsman, today

only The Guardian and The Observer. The BBC has a very structured complaints system .

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 24

The journalists’ opinion towards the Ombudsman

The impact of ombudsman varies widely among journalists from different countries. It seems quite

obvious that the presence or not of this figure in the different countries determines the results and that

explains the positive opinion in those countries where the concept of the ombudsman exists.

The ombudsman is the self-regulatory instrument with the least impact (with a total mean value of 2.32 out of 5) according to European journalists

(survey MediaAcT 2012)

An example of this is Spain (with a mean value of 2.80, above the total

average), a country where the ombudsman plays an important role.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 25

Letters to the editor: a general view

• This subgenre was born in the UK press in the middle of the 18th century.• It is often one of the most popular sections.• The public interest contrasts with little academic attention.• Generally, the letters address current issues but they also refer to editors’ opinion or content published by the media.

This instrument has allowed public participation several centuries.

Before Web 2.0 and

the online era,

letters to the editor

allowed interactivity

between media and citizens

Some authors call those letters which criticize the media ‘intervention letters”. It is in this type of letters where media accountability with the public is put in practice.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 26

Letters to the editor as a MAI

They talk about the publication in general: ideology, product, company. The function of the review focuses on letters for or against the media.

The authors have established different kinds of letters depending on the way they talk about the media

They talk about a text already published. The letter can edit the information provided by the reporter and editors or put in question what was written by the journalist.

Those that refer to a particular issue, providing a pro/contra perspective.

Weak points: - Generally is known very little about the type of filter used to decide which letters are published and

which are not.- Rare finding one published letters containing harsh criticism to the media itself, especially when media

have established systems to channel this criticism (ombudsman, complaints offices, etc..).-  It is unknown to what extent the media pay attention to the criticism that appear in those letters.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 27

Press Council ReferencesAlsius, S., M. Mauri, R. Rodriguez. 2013. “The perception of journalists regarding the effectiveness of traditional instruments of self-regulation.” In: Mapping Media Accountability - in Europe and Beyond, edited by Eberwein, T., S. Fengler, E. Lauk and T. Leppik-Bork, 155-167. Köln: Herbert von Halem Verlag.Fielden, L. 2012. Regulating the Press: A Comparative Study of International Press Councils. Oxford: Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism.Gore, W. 2008. “Self-regulatory bodies.” In The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook, edited by Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, 33-44. Vienna.Harastzi, M. 2008. “The merits of media self-regulation. Balancing rights and responsibilities”. In: The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook, edited by Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe., 9-20. Vienna.Hafez, K. 2002. “Journalism Ethics Revisited: A Comparison of Ethics Codes in Europe, North Africa, the Middle East, and Muslim Asia” in Political Communication, 19: 225-250. Koene, D.2009. Press Councils in Western Europe. Studies for the Netherlands Press. Diemen: AMB. Laitina, T. 1995. “Journalistic Codes of Ethics in Europe”, in European Journal of Communication, 10: 527-544.Puddephatt, A. 2011: “The Importance of Self Regulation of the Media in Upholding Freedom of Expression”, in CI Debates, Communication and Information, 9 – February 2011. UNESCO.Puppis, M. 2009. “Self-Regulation by European Press Councils: Structures, Procedures and the Management of Legitimacy”. Journalism Studies Conference “The Future of Journalism”, Cardiff, September 9-10, 2009.Zlatev, O. 2008. “The Press Council. The archetype of a self-regulatory body.”In The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook, edited by Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe., 45-66. Vienna.

July 2013 Session 5 – MAI on the professional level 28

Ombudsman ReferencesMaurus, V. 2008. “The Ombudsman. Media self-regulation within a news outlet.” In The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook, edited by Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, 67–83. Vienna.  AZNAR, Hugo (2005): Comunicación responsable. Madrid: Ariel. 2nd edition. Chapter 6-2: “El ombudsman" (pp. 220-244).Elia, C. 2007. “Vierzig Jahre Presseombudsmann: Wer sind die Leserschaftsanwälte und wie kommunizieren sie? Eine vergleichende Analyse” [Forty years of newspaper ombudsman: who are the readers’ advocates and how do they communicate? A comparative analysis]. Zeitschrift für Kommunikationsökologie und Medienethik 1: 100–105.Evers, H., H. Groenhart, J. Groesen. 2010. “The News Ombudsman: Watchdog or Decoy?” In Studies for the Netherlands Press. Diemen: AMB.Herrera Damas, S. 2005. “Situación del ombudsman en el mundo”, in Sala de prensa, n. 76, February 2005. http://www.saladeprensa.org/art586.htmMaciá, C. B. 2006. La figura del defensor del lector, del oyente y del telespectador. Los paladines del periodismo descaminado [The figure of the ombudsman, the listener and the viewer. Champions of misguided journalism]. Madrid: Universitas.Restrepo, J. D. 2005. “El derecho a la información en la agenda del ombudsman”, in Sala de prensa, n. 76, February 2005.  Zeta de Pozo, R. and S. HERRERA. 2005. “Situación del ombudsman en Latinoamérica” in Sala de prensa, n. 76, February 2005.

Letters to the Editor References  Buell, E. 1975. “Eccentrics or Gladiators? People Who Write About Politics in Letters to the Editor”, Social Science Quarterly, 56: 440-449.Forsythe, S. A. 1950. “An Exploratory Study of Letters to the Editor and Their Contributors”, Public Opinion Quarterly 14: 143-44.Pastor, L. 2010. Teoría de las cartas al director. La gestión periodística del público I (nueva edición). Barcelona: Editorial UOCTarrant, W. D. 1957. “Who Writes Letters to the Editor?”. Journalism Quarterly, 34: 501-502.Vacib, G. 1965. “A study of letter-writers”, Journalism Quarterly, 42: 464-465.