Although 69% of the respondents indicated that their respective editorial teams have codes of ethics in place, only 21% indicated that the code is referred to in the newsroom on a regular basis. The survey further highlighted that only 55% of the respondents felt confident that editors have the authority to guarantee work environments that are conducive to ethical journalism and 47% agreed that "a culture in our editorial team to discuss ethical issues in stories" seem to exist.
Further investigation into the role of the sub-editor in checking facts of news stories was further highlighted by respondents as work experience and levels of authority were raised as concerns.
The independent survey, which was sponsored and conducted in November 2010 by Consulta Research, an associate of Business Enterprises (University of Pretoria), also highlighted the seemingly competitive nature that exists between newspapers which impacts on ethical standards of news stories.
This perspective, coupled with pressurised journalists and the publication of news stories without proper cross checking of facts, suggests that the emphasis has shifted from news quality to news quantity. Stringent deadline and editorial requirements are additional factors at play.
Explains Yusuf Abramjee, Press Club chairperson: "One immediate and critical action to be taken is to entrench the application of existing codes of ethics across the board as the indicated 69% is not good enough. This requires a complete buy-in by editorial teams alike, across the country. Enhancing the continuous application of these codes on a day-to-day basis, the National Press Club, in partnership with key representative stakeholder groups, will help promote this important action."
The work environment survey aimed to provide a snapshot of the current working conditions as experienced by mainstream journalists and reporters nationally.
Explains Prof Adre Schreuder, MD of Consulta Research: "The survey, a first in its kind in South Africa, targeted members and non-members of the National Press Club across print, broadcast and online fields, and highlighted work environment areas that are perceived to be both conducive and non-conducive to ethical journalism by mainstream journalists and reporters.
"The survey placed strong emphasis on ethical areas as the aim of the research was to establish where and how ethical standards, practices and behaviours - seen from a journalist's perspective - should be strengthened and supported, especially in the newsroom where both editor and journalist face immense pressure to turn out critical news stories of the day," adds Schreuder.
Other suggestions in regard to critical areas which may lead to the improvement of journalists' workflow in meeting the ethical standards and quality they aspire to in their writing include the need for more resources (hands-on capacity and tools of trade), engagement with senior editorial teams and skills development/training. The appointment of more staff and allocation of resources will relieve some of the pressure caused by deadlines, allowing them to focus more on quality and give journalists more time to check facts regularly.
Respondents also indicated that more control over the use of copy should be given to them. The anticipated establishment of the Media Tribunal was met with concern as 81% of journalists currently perceive the tribunal as limiting the freedom of journalists and reporters.
Although the survey highlighted ethical areas of concern in the newsroom, the majority (56 - 64%) felt comfortable with the overall levels of ethics practised in their media organisations, coupled with checks and balances to ensure factual correctness of news stories, overall awareness of ethical issues on a day-to-day basis and the way their companies manage and correct ethical issues in news stories. The availability of senior colleagues for advice and guidance to journalists working on news stories came out strong, while journalists also experience encouragement to publish/broadcast a correction (knowing who to contact at each platform where something has to be corrected or changed) and raise objections knowing that it will be taken seriously.
