Reprinted/rom JOliRNAI.ISM QliARTFRLY: Vol. 65. No . I (Spring 1988). !'!' 71-77

By Sandra Braman

P ublic Expe~tations of Media Versus Standards in Codes of Ethics

Public has a different sense of news standards than media do and therefore has different expectations.

._ While it is clear that the public. the press and the government share an interest in media codes of ethics, research to date has not explored the degree to which those three grolips agree on the nature of desirable performance stan-dards. In particular. very little attention has been given to public expectations of behavioral standards o.- codes of ethics for the media.

This study takes a first step m addressing this gap by examini11g public attitudes towards standards for journalists as expressed in complaints to the National News Council (NNC), and comparing those standards with codes of ethics established by the media themselves . While News Council complaints by no means provide a statistically reliable

• S«tt, "·8 .. John L Huhena, 17w Mtt.umgttr'# Motives.· Elllica/ Problmas of tlrtt Nt!ws Medill (Enp~wood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, Inc:., 1976~.

l Lynda M. Maddox aod Eric J . Zanot, •swpcnlion of the NAB Code and lu Effect on ReFlation of Advertisins.~ Journ11lism (/uDTit!rly. 61 : 125-J 30 ( 19114).

J 11M: notion of neutral reportaae is diacussed in Cynthia Johnston Crus, ~ 'The Privileae of Neutral Reponase' -EdWQrtb v. NQlioraal Audubon Socif!ly. lnt: .• - Utah Law &vif!w, 1978:J47-JS9; Theodore L Glauer, ~Newsworthy Accusations aod the Privileae of Neutral Reportaae." Communicotion QuDrttrfy. 28;49-56 ( 1980); Jad R. Hart, •nn: Risht of Neutral Reportage,- JourMII.sm Qrmrterly, 56:2)4.. 277 ( 1979); and Harry W. Stone

local censorsh ip boards.~ The seco nd was during the 1970s. following the Watergate experience. In addition to voluntary participation," a variety of influences upon the development of these codes has oecn cited, inc1uding the impact of the Nat ionallndustriai Recovery Act 7 and the C'ode of Wartime Practices . ~ fear of further governmental intervention if not of oul -and-o ut censo rship, 0 public relations concerns,111 fears of propa-ganda. I I and the proceSS of i ns.titutionaJ-i7ation itsetf. 12 Peterson argues that the development of codes of ethics is evidence of a pervasive trend away from acceptance of a libertarian theory of the press towards a social responsibility theory, n a notion supported by Oesmond.14 Little is known of the relationship between codes of ethics and actual behavior.

Four codes of ethics were chosen for the purposes of this study. Out of the many industries fo r which codes have been developed. includ jng public rela-tions, advertising, motion picture and comic book, two print .iournalism and two broadcast codes were chosen because they were believed to be the most innuentiat The Canons of J o urnaJlsm ( 1923) of the American Society of Newspaper Editors was the first to be developed that was not newspaper-specific or !imited to a single state. 1t was rewritten in 1975. The SPJ,SDX code. intended for journalists working in all media, was adopted in 1973. Though it was modeled after the ASN E canons. the SP.J.SDX code tends to cast il s rules in far more specific terms. The National Association o f Broadcasters ( N/\ B) Radio C ode was fir st w dtten in the early 1930s and we nt through two revisions during the same decade. The first NAB Television Code was written in 1952. borrowing hoth from the Radio Code and from the Motio n Picture Production Code of Mot ion Picture P rod ucers and Dislributors of America, itself written in 1

Puhlic E:r:pectatiom (~(Media v .L Code Standards 73

represents about I / 6 of those submitted.;, improvements in the media. A second to the organization. Complaints received Schafer study 111 reached similar conclu-were not followed up if they were about sions, this time stressing the appeal of local rather than national media, if they vindication via news council over the were not interpretable in terms address- attempt to succeed in a trial court. able by the Council (many ''complaints" were actually essays or other forms of discourse), or if complainants failed to comply with the Council's procedural requirements. Procedural requirements included the 5igning of an affidavit waiving the right to pursue a complaint handled by the Council through the legal system. A minimum amount of specificity and evidence about the subject of complaints was also required. The Council also completed three major studies on issues it had identified as of critical national concern, such as the problem of unidentified sources brought to the fore by the 1980 Janet Cooke hoax. 16

Complain~nts to the National News Council are obviously self-selected. Some research has looked at attitudes and motivations of those members of the general public who choose to provide feedback to the media in this manner. Several studies discussed by Schafer' 7 all showed that both complainants to the Minnesota News Council and the media' (including those who had been ruled against by the council) were very much in favor of the organ~zation after several years of existence. The public, however, perceived a moderate bias toward the media in council decisions. The public also saw the council as an opportunity for vindication rather than long-term

1• Patricia l. Dooley, David Ilaueen and Richard Chapman. A Guitk to the A~chlws oftlw Nt~tiotu~f N~w:1 Council (Minneapolis: Silha Ct!nter "for the Study of Media Ethics and LAw, 1986).

11 Robert Schafer, ~News Media and Complainant Attitudes toward the Minnesota News Council; lownalism Quartuly. 56:744-m < 1979).

u Robert Schafer, "The Minnesota News Council; Devclopina StaDdanb for Prcu Etbica,- Jawr-"sm Q-rtrrly. 58:35S-362 (1981).

•• The oriainal complaint tcxu. alon1 with lite rest of the archives of the National News Council, arc now housed at the University or Minnesota's Walter library.

10 Thouah the NAB codes were ruled in violation of anti-trust lnts by the 1prcssive Judge Harold Greene in 19&2. M~d

74 JOURNALISM QUARTERLY

parcnl hcscs indicate number of NNC complaints citing each standard.)

I) Standards that dt/"ine the role of thl' media. The public good aspect of press activities dominates the public's expecta-tion of the role of the media. While media codes stress a proactive role, however, the puhlic seems to place more emphasis on placing bounds on and tempering the effects of media activities.

Of the 24 standards enunciated in this area. 10 such as "search for the truth" and "criticize the government .. ·- were mentioned only in media codes of ethics, while eight such as "don't create events" and "don't try to manipulate opinion" ···- were mentioned only by the public.

In descending order. the standards most frequently mentioned in NNC complaints were: "don't use media to serve private ends" ( 13), "don't try to manipulate opinion" (9), "be proactive" (4), "don't try to manipulate events" (3), and "don't create events" (3). The greatest concur-rence among media codes of ethics was found on the standards ''search for the truth" and "serve the public interest."

2) Standard.~ f'ertaining to media effects. Seven standards were enunciated that demand a sensitivity to media effects. The public asks the media to think about their impact on news subjects ( 15), readers ( 14), to .. foment no discrimination or prejudice" ( \0), to be accountable for what they publish (5), to think about their impact on the community (4). and to protect children (I). There was no agreement with the public standard, .. take special care when in monopoly position" (2).

While print media join the public in mentioning accountability, the broadcast media did not. More specific effects are mentioned by the broadcast media, however, reflecting FCC influence.

3) Standards pertaininR to facticity. Concerns about facticity were the most common in both complaints to the

. National News Council and in media codes of ethics (see Table 1). A total of J4 different standards dealing with facticity were enunciated altogether. Only

TAU I.E

Standards Pertaining to Facticity

Standards

Be factually accurate3 b c:: d Include all facts available Don'l manipulate statistical data Don't distort facts willfully• b c d Check all facts Make correctionsa Use onl~dacts of which know origin Don't lie Attribute quotes fairly Don·t distort for commercial reasons Don't editorialize in newsb c d Don't distort quotes Suppress no facts deliberateJ:-r• Don't fictionalizec d Facts should be consistent with each other·

Editorials should be based on facts• b Corrections should be equal to

original story in weight &. placement Investigate challenges to facts Identify sources Don't make defamatory statements Don't use unfounded slatistics Don't mislabel Make corrections immediatelv• b Corrections should be compl~teb Don't reprint errors cite sources of casualty figures Give all sources• Be objectiveb Don't present hypotheses as fact Base editorials on official statistics All rules apply to editorializing'" Be realisticc Be truthfulb Corrections should be prominent•

•Included in ASNE code. blncluded in SPJ.SDX code. clncluded in NAB radio code. dlncluded in NAB TV code.

fl NNC

Comp_

53 23 22 20 19 15 13

.13 10 9 7 7 6 6

5 5

5 4 4 3 3 I I I I 1

I 0 0 0 0

three were listed by the media and not mentioned by the public, while 18 were identified by the public but not the media. In descending order, the standards most commonly mentioned by complainants to the NNC were "be factually accurate" (53), "include all facts available'' (23), "don't manipulate statistical data" (22), "don't distort facts wilfully" (20), .. check all facts" (29). "make corrections" ( 15).

Puhlic l:"xpC'ctatiom o( !Hcdia 1·s. Code Standard~ 75

"usc only facts of which know origin" ( 1.1). and "don't lie" ( 13).

There are several distinct differences bet ween the public and the media regarding their notions of facticity as revealed by this examination of standards. First, the public seems to have a sense that there is a fixed body of facts that comprises either "a story" or ••the news" in its totality. With this sense of facticity, the public often judges the media by whether or not they have gotten "all" the facts. This standard is not shared by media professionals, who do not see the facts of stories or news as either finite or necessarily fixed. Thus, "facts should be consistent with each other" is mentioned· five times by the public and never by the media. for example.

Second, the public is much more inclined than the media to attribute intention to inaccuracy or omission of facts. Thus members of the public set a standard like "don't lie" ( 13), whereas the media prefer "don't fictionali7.e" (6). The former statement assumes bias, while the latter implies a more neutral role.

Third, complainants to the NNC set more specific criteria than do the media, particularly regarding sources and correc-tions. Thus the public says "identify sources" (4) and gets no resonance in media codes of ethics. The same thing happens with "corrections should be equal to original story in weight and placement" (5).

In this category the two groups differ in their view of the neutrality of the tools of journalism. The public seems to express a sense that procedure, technique, can and does serve persuasive ends while journalists claim a neutrality for their news-gathering tools.

4) Standards pertaining to the logic of interpretation. There is an acute differ-ence between media and public in this category. The logic of interpretation -the way stories are put together from facts once gathered - - is apparently of great concern to the public but of minimal interest to the media (see Table 2). Of the 18 stand a rds enunciated in this category

TABLE2

Standards Pertaining to the Logic of Interpretation

II NNC

Standards Complaints

Don't generalize from a few examples 13

Interpret facts the way experts doa II

Don't take statements from sources out of context II Don't misinterpret facts I 0 Don't oversimplify complex. issues 9

Don't use faulty reasoning" 7 Don't make unfounded accusations . 6

Interpret facts according to authorities 5

Comparisons should be valid 4 Don't imply sources not the~ 4 Define terms 3 Don't use leading statements 3 Watch assumptions 2 Don't use unprovable inferences 2 Use onlv relevant descriptors I Leave no ambiguity Include rationale for choice of evidence

Editorialize correctly

•Included in SPJ,SDX code. blncluded in NAB TV code.

altogether, only 2 were mentioned by the media at all.

The public is concerned about elemen-tary logical errors. Thus .. don't generalize from a few examples" was mentioned by 13 complainants, .. don't take statements from sources out of context" by II, .. don't oversimplify complex issues" by 9, .. don't make unfounded accusations" by 6, "comparisons should be valid" by 4, and "don't use leading statements" by 3. One complainant would like to see a rationale given for choice of evidence in a news story.

At the same time, many complainants seem to equate a .. correct" logic of interpretation with that offered by experts or officials. Thus II mentioned "interpret facts the way experts do," and 5 said "interpret facts according to authorities."

76 JOURNALlSM QUARTERLY

The also-popular "do n't misinterpret facts" ( 10) provides less direct advice to journalists.

5) Standards for fact-gathering proce-dures. As was the case with facticity, in this category the public sought a higher level of detail than did the media. Sixteen of the total of 25 standards included here were mentioned by the public and not the media, while only four were described by the media but not the public.

The public showed a lot of interest in the honesty of fact-gathering methods (8) and interview practices (4) . Specific practices were discussed by some, such as "don't interrupt respondent during interview" (I). There was a lot of concern about sources: '' use all available sources" (8), "go to more than one source" (2), "investigate sources for accuracy" (2), "use the same type of sources for both sides of a story" (I), "watch for source conOict of interest" (I), and so on.

Few of the specific practices discussed by the public are mentioned by the media. Media interest .was directed elsewhere: ''honor review or restriction agreements

·with sources" (0) and "respect privacy of news subjects" (0).

Some members of the public seem to feel not only that a story is comprised of a fixed body of facts. but that those facts are concrete, findable, and easily identi-fied . Thus the public could conceive of a standard like " don't include irrelevant information" (2), while the media would not. Again , one gets a sense that the media claim a n

Puhlk Exrwclat;on.~ t!f Mt>dia ''·"· Codt> StondarJ.r 77

letters . These specific item~ rn broadcast codes of ethics again renect regulatory requiremtn(s placed on the med1um by the FCC

8) Sumdardsfor media knowledge base. These standards again play a large role in the mind of the public as revealed by complaints. while it is not of importance to the media. Complainants identified several specific a..-eas in which it was felt that media knowledge was so low that the resultant reporting was inaccurate, inctuding science (4), the criminal law system (3), law in general (2). education (1 ) , accounting (1), government (1), manufacturing (I). sexual distinctions (I), business (I), and weapons and defense (I). To .-emedy the situation, complainants suggest lhat journalists ought to know more in general (2). should actively seek out technical explanations p), and should have technical experts on the staffs ·of media organizations (I). The S P J,SDX agreement that technical explanations should be actively sought is the only mention in any of the media codes of ethics of the quality of knowledge base appropriate to media activity.

9) Standards perr•'nent to public access. Complainants to the NNC outlined six standards encouraging grealer public access to the media, but finds media agreement only in the prin t aclmowledg-ment of a right ·Of reply to specific charges_ (It may be that broadcaste·rs fell that the specificity of the FCC's Equal Time Provision and the Fa~rness Doctrine did not require repetition within their codes or ethics_) What complainants wanted included general "access to media .. (4), unedited letters tQ the editor (4), a solicitation of a response from news subjects after a story is published (3), and a g~neral right of reply (I).

Summary of F;ndings Some general statements can be made

summanz..ing the information across all nine categories of standards suggested .

I) The public as represented by comp~ainants to the National News Council has a sense of news as a fi;J

JOURNALISM

ovcrgeneralization. ambiguity and over-simplification. Complainants were also concerned about logical news errors of a very basic kind and thus would set standards that echo those taught in secondary schools: don't use leading statements, don't present hypotheses as fact, use only relevant descriptors, etc.

Complainants express concern about these logical errors because, again, the real-world consequences of their use are known. The media either do not appear to expect logical consistency in news stories ~· or assume it so deeply that it need not be mentioned. Whatever the causal explanation, there is another gap between public expectations and media codes of ethics in this area.

QUARTERLY

The window provided by complaints to the National News Council on public expectations of behavioral standards for the media reveals that these expectations differ from standards established in media codes of ethics in several important dimensions. The many categories of standards made apparent in this explor-atory study could provide a conceptual basis for some rigorous investigation of public perceptions of media behavior. Such research should be useful in the attempt to reduce the gap in perceptions of appropriate standards of media behavior, with the further goal of increasing the credibility of the media.