Ethics in Journalism: Where is the Line?

What is ethics anyway? It’s people’s behavior based on moral principles. Yes, the deeper you go, the less clarity there seems to be. And moral principles are about the very question of “what is good and what is bad.” Journalism, too, has its own ethics and moral principles, which should not be neglected.

In almost all countries, ethical codes for journalists are developed. Usually, this is done by various journalist associations. Such codes are designed to remind journalists of the boundaries they should not cross in their work, so as not to undermine trust in journalists and the media, and not to lose self-respect.

What do these codes generally say? Here are a few examples:

A journalist acknowledges and abides by the laws of their country but should not succumb to government pressure in their professional activities.

They only distribute information they are confident is truthful.

A journalist strives not to harm people with their materials.

They must clearly distinguish between facts and opinions.

A journalist should not resort to illegal methods of obtaining information.

The deliberate spreading of lies and fake news is considered absolute evil.

It is recommended not to accept rewards from third parties (in other words, journalists should only be paid by their editorial office, and not, for example, by politicians or businesspeople who request something to be written or hidden).

If a journalist makes a mistake or commits defamation, they should correct it and apologize in the same media outlet where the false information was published.

If information was provided under the condition of anonymity, the source should not be disclosed.

It is not permissible to use offensive language in their materials, including derogatory remarks about people of certain nationalities, religions, or other groups.

Presumption of innocence: One should not call someone guilty of something or a criminal until it is proven in court.

To put it another way: the main thing for a journalist is to honestly and objectively convey information. One should not deliberately lie or spread falsehoods. Efforts must also be made to verify information and avoid unintentionally spreading misinformation. If you make a mistake, apologize.

A journalist should strive to be as independent as possible. Yes, to some degree, we are all dependent, for example, on the media outlet owner. But you should not “dance to someone else’s tune,” advocate for specific ideas in exchange for rewards, or, ideally, be affiliated with political parties.

There must be a balance between seeking and disclosing information, on the one hand, and invading privacy, on the other. It’s undesirable to disturb people and cause them discomfort. But sometimes, if the information is of public importance, compromises have to be made. For instance, reporting that an official bought a mansion in Europe for his daughter may be unpleasant for his family, but if it directly indicates corruption, journalists might proceed with it.

Or another example: a terrorist attack has occurred. The journalist must report it, and moreover, provide details, show the horror of what happened. How can they avoid harming people, offending their feelings, or causing pain? After all, the photo may show someone’s deceased child, and in the background, a mother screaming. People are in shock, they are grieving—how can you photograph and interview them at this moment? Every journalist must find their own balance between fulfilling their professional duties and common sense.

There is another nuance experts discuss. Journalists are competing with bloggers. Meanwhile, bloggers don’t try to adhere to ethical standards, and as journalists carefully weigh every word and examine each photo, they lose popularity to bloggers. In this situation, some journalists may stray from the standards of quality journalism in pursuit of popularity.