Honor Among Journalists

  By Florida Bill

                                       Are journalists held to any code of conduct, or are they free to say anything about any person or event in the public eye?  Does anyone watch the watchers? 
                                       And when journalists fabricate, intentionally or unintentionally, and use their position of trust to bullwhip candidates, office holders and politicians, is that to be accepted as the price to be paid for having a country which guarantees freedom of speech and a free press?
                                       When the news is "fake" which it often is, and the accusations against these "public figures" in the news are clearly false, does any news person's professional reputation take a hit?  Where is the accountability, the correction, the apology? The sloppiness and irresponsibility of today's media, and its incredible, bullet proof arrogance, is beyond belief.                                                                                   Recently, CNN and "Buzzfeed" sent out a phony story about President-elect Trump, claiming a British intelligence officer's report had revealed  immoral behavior and his collusion with Russian authorities to manipulate the election. The story had no "legs," and was designed to humiliate Trump, who has become the media's arch enemy.
                                      Fox News anchor Shepard Smith demonstrated the arrogance and resistance typical of the media in the face of obvious dishonest news gathering.  "It is our observation," said Smith, " that (CNN and Buzzfeed) correspondents followed journalistic standards and that neither they nor any other journalists should be subjected to belittling or de-legitimatizing by the President elect of the United States."       
                                      The sad and short answer of course is no one holds the media accountable. Having watchers who watch public actions, riding herd on public figures, is a good thing, one of the hallmarks of our democracy.  When public officials fail to live up to the public trust, it is the press that calls them out and demands action. But when the media lies, and fabricates out of personal enmity or political bias, who takes them to task?  The answer is no one. 
                                       Some say there are libel and slander laws which provide appropriate sanctions.  Not so.  Libel and slander are fairly effective when the slandered person is an ordinary citizen outside the public arena. But these anti-defamation laws are virtually meaningless in situations involving the media and public figures such as office holders and candidates for public office. 
                                        Jim Strong a retired Chicago Tribune reporter and Labor editor, sees libel laws relative to politics as a "fraud."  "They allow corrupt publishers and writers to  profit from publishing or broadcasting garbage without any fear of the victims they beat up on," he said.  
                                        The unvarnished truth is that the media can say virtually anything about a candidate or a public official without fear of liability.  "Absence of malice" is always the "get out of jail free" card for a reporter and the company he or she works for. 
                                         The respected and renowned Col. Robert R. McCormick, late and great publisher of the Chicago Tribune, used to say that a newspaper (the media) delivers that check upon government which no Constitution has ever been able to provide. 
Very true, Colonel, but no one checks up on the checkers.                                                          Journalism professors established the        
 Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) in 1908, which has drafted a journalist's "Code of Ethics." It encourages honesty and integrity and spells out guidelines for reporters.  
                       Yet it is not a set of rules, opines Don Kirk, a veteran Asian correspondent for various newspapers, but only a guide that encourages all who engage in journalism to take responsibility for the information they provide, regardless of medium. But the missing element in the SPJ dicta is the prescribed enforcement mechanism of its recommended code. Consequences for sending out phony news reports attacking the character of public figures do not exist. 
                                        Defenders of the press who are so appalled by President-elect Trump's Twitter rants against the media are quick to respond with lofty statements about the tradition of honor and integrity among newsmen. There is never a suggestion that maybe, just maybe, there is a kernel of truth in what the new president is saying, and that something ought to be done about the mendacious members of the press corps, and the companies which endorse such conduct.                                                                                                                                       Journalists must come together and enact codes of enforceable conduct with due process rights accorded alleged violators.  It is not enough to spell out how a reporter must handle the job of covering the news in a moral and professional way. The elephant in the room is the lack of accountability for lying journalists intending to destroy a news subject whose ideology runs counter to that of the newsman's and the company he works for. 
                                       It is possible to uphold freedom of the press and still penalize reporters who dishonor it with their lies and fabrications.  Sanctions should range from a reprimand to loss of press credentials.  It is not and can never be government which regulates the media, only the profession itself.   It is time that the media starts weeding out its own bad actors.
                                               XXX