Media Ethics;Media Ethics and Media Objectivity
Term paper
Mainly, it examines the problems we face in the media business. That's probably where the rain first began pelting us...
Media Ethics and Media Objectivity
In the middle of a crisis that seems to challenge the existence of the industry of journalism, it may appear odd to describe the contention surrounding objective reporting of news. Since the start of the 20th century, the objectivity doctrine which represents the canon of professional journalism is faced with a heated debate regarding what the future of journalism could look like. In the current era, objectivity is the tool that has caused the failure of the mainstream media in building a strong connection with the public (Riegert, Roosvall, & Widhold, 2015). Whenever objectivity is ascribed as the panacea or the problem, the two schools of thought attempt to borrow a leaf from the idea that journalists ought to pick either of the options; renewal of the commitment that sustains the image of objectivity or embracing opinion journalism.
The contemporary state of media objectivity in Kenya can be described by a case study of the Presidential debate of 2017 in how Jubilee as a political formation demonstrated the state of media in connection to the organization of the debate. During the party’s pronouncement of its withdrawal from the presidential debate, Raphael Tuju, then Jubilee Party Secretary General posed a claim implying “whole things smell of conmanship”. The leader triggered a debate that propagated the need to know who the organizers were and their intentions. He went deeper in castigating a tainted image of the media as he wondered whom the organizers acted for and the mandate they had to prepare and organize the debate. It can be opined that such words used by a prominent figure in the political space had consequences that were far-reaching on the position and the role taken by the Kenyan media. Majorly this impact indicated greater weight because the questions targeted the media essence in the national democracy and politics. Besides, it touched on the media’s ability in providing important and objective information that determines the basis of public decisions. If the media lack of trust of the journalists and the various organizations they represent is a huge blow and attacks how objectivity is attained in later productions (Miladi, 2022). Thus, if media personalities fail in rolling up their sleeves with an aim of producing objective information that connects them with the public, it points out that objectivity in media is becoming outdated.
In the general election discussion in August 2022, the same scenario was replicated. Candidates from various regions of the nation did not participate in the county debates that were hosted by various organizations. The head of the Azimio party, Hon. Raila Amolo Odinga, called on the secretariat to resolve the problem of what topics and questions would be covered during the discussion. Questions that candidates did not want to answer were frequently put aside due to candidate’s demands. The debates brought out the sharp emphasis on the topics that should be covered, dealing a blow to press objectivity, and ethical standards. The press then as stated as the fourth estate lost its magnanimity and focus as the society’s advocate.
Impartiality and Objectivity in the Digital Age, is it possible?
In the digital age, impartiality and objectivity are two aspects that are expected to go through a test of time in how professional judgment is reported. When it comes to the concept of impartiality, there are a number of unique characteristics that describe its efficiency; honesty, openness, accuracy, clear sourcing and evidence, and independence of mind (Ward, 2014). All these features do not ascribe to agonistic reporting in journalism. However, other circumstances require more application of objectivity such as when a climate of hate speech is the scenario or while reporting genocide. For instance, taking a study on the media role in 2007 when there was tribal violence following the announcement of the Presidential elections indicated the need for a media public service that is stronger. A media service with both impartiality and objectivity values would have engaged in far-reaching approaches to hinder hate speech and promote free debate bearing in mind that there is a rise of numbers in terms of unregulated media content in this new digital era.
The current contention here according to my opinion as opposed to the focus on the main purpose of impartiality and objectivity, these disciplines have become devalued in their sense of application leaving a loophole for debate about attachment journalism and views from other impromptu sources. Confrontation of the issues facing the digital information era will require a build-up of the left values around these two important media ideas (Sambrook, 2012). It is evident that the new information age crops great challenges affecting the impartiality and objectivity norms that are over a century old. Disconnecting with the unique standards these norms were designed to propagate in media will be highly sloppy and dangerous to an extent of accelerating a ‘post-truth’ media environment.
Stronger values of impartiality and objectivity can be possible in Kenyan media and journalism at large when a number of approaches are stressed in information management. Media houses and journalists should cultivate the aspect of attaining greater transparency.
As noted in the COVID- 19 pandemic Impartiality and Objectivity of the information required to pass to the general public from the mainstream media was seen as a key information point for many as an avalanche of news items, fake stories, and unfiltered information later known as the infodemic was noted with great concern. As noted by researchers the Corona Virus information was sourced mainly from Social media rather than mainstream media houses (Ogweno, Oduor, & Mutisya, 2021).
The need for active engagement of the general public on where to source the information has been noted as a key gap in the communication era of digital media. (Metzger, 2007) Defining objectivity as a process that involves identifying the purpose of the site and whether the information provided is fact or opinion, which also includes understanding whether there might be commercial intent or a conflict of interest on the part of the source, as well as the nature of relationships between linked information sources (e.g., the meaning of “sponsored links” on a Google search output page), Metzinger has shown the areas and curriculum used to develop key tenets in defining objectivity and reality on the online platforms. Tools developed by several organizations to check on the reality of the day have come into play and have over time been seen as the backbone of developing objectivity online as well as calling out the players in the space who have become key sources of information
Transparency which is perceived as the new objectivity is the primary tool for enabling openness and trust in media (Harvey, 2021). When transparency is achieved, the reader acquires the intended information and fosters reliability in media content. Besides, I would suggest that more emphasis on media literacy and education will be a resolved weapon in tackling the challenges that come with the information era. People ought to be concerned more with the information itself (authenticity, objectivity, factuality, and impartiality) than they are interested in the sources of this information. Finally, it is significant for the general media to focus on emerging communications technologies to develop a certain journalism that connects citizens with journalists in a transaction that recognizes mutual discovery. Therefore, through these strategies, it is possible to attain impartiality and objectivity values of media in the digital age.
References
Harvey, S. (2021). Impartiality, fairness, and the bias of Empire. Global Media Ethics and the Digital Revolution, 1(3), 38–52. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003203551-2
Miladi, N. (2022). Global Media Ethics and the Digital Revolution. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Riegert, K., Roosvall, A., & Widholm, A. (2015). The political in cultural journalism. Journalism Practice, 9(6), 773–790. https://doi.org/10.1080/17512786.2015.1051358
Sambrook, R. (2012). Delivering trust: impartiality and objectivity in the digital age (Publisher's version, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism Reports). Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Department of Politics and International Relations, University of Oxford.
Metzger, M. J. (2007). Making sense of credibility on the Web: Models for evaluating online information and recommendations for future research. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 58(13), 2078–2091. https://doi.org/10.1002/ASI.20672
Ogweno, S. O., Oduor, K., & Mutisya, R. (2021). Sources of information on COVID-19 among the youths and its implications on mental health. A cross-sectional study in Nairobi, Kenya. East African Medical Journal, 98(1), 3390–3400. Retrieved from https://www.ajol.info/index.php/eamj/article/view/205320
Ward, S. J. (2014). Radical Media Ethics. Digital Journalism, 2(4), 455–471. https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2014.952985