Recommendations on Media and Ethics (2007). Media and
Ethics International Symposium Speeches and Final Report, Gazi Üniversitesi
İletişim Fakültesi, 2007, Kırkıncı Yıl Kitaplığı No: 6, ISBN: 978-975-507-222-7, pp. 205-210
İrfan
Erdoğan
The
International Symposium on Ethics in Media organized by Turkish National
Commission for UNESCO, The Scientific and Technological Research Council of
Turkey (TUBITAK) and Gazi University, aimed at discussing the intricate
relations among communication, society and ethics.
The
media and ethics issue has been one of the enduring issues in communication
over a century. It has been discussed by interested parties from public and
academic institutions to non-governmental organizations. Since the emergence of
the new liberal policies in mid 1980’s, the control of the access of information
through media concentration has led to increased debates concerning the ethical
dimension of communication in national and international levels. The UNESCO
which is one of major international
organizations is naturally concerned with the ethical issues in media.
Media
ethics have been discussed extensively in the developed world, while mostly
given no proper and adequate attention in the other parts of the globe. This
symposium was organized in order to address the issue in different setting. It was
named as The International Symposium on Media and Ethics and has been convened
in Ankara, on November 3-4, 2006. It was organized in cooperation with Turkish
National Commission For UNESCO, The Scientific and Technological Research
Council of Turkey and Faculty of Communication, Gazi University. Many
international scientist and representatives of non-government organizations
have participated in the symposium as speakers and guests. The major topics
were included “Communication, Society and Ethics”, “Technology, Content and
Ethics Issues”, How to deal with the ethics issues: Problems and Solutions from
Media Industry and NGO’s”, “How to deal with the ethics issues: Reflections
from Academicians.” There were lively and enlightening exchanges among the speakers
and participants during the panel discussion on the ethics in global and local
markets.
Dealing
with the interconnections among and practices on the communication, society and
ethics, speakers talked about the economic, social, cultural, technological and
informational structures, pointed out that the USA seeks to establish a widespread
control in the US and throughout the world, and provided concrete examples of
bias, coercion, punishment, manipulation, mind management and domination.
Following
general and specific recommendations emerged from the presentations and
discussions during the symposium:
o Every
society has its own ethical values and practices.
o Ethics
is not the regulating and ruling force of the society.
o Ethics
is not a product of an universal idea, thought, practice or will. Ethics is an
integrated part of historically formed organized human activity.
o Ethics
is an end-product of the material and immaterial production relations with
normative prescriptions.
o Ethics
mostly performs a legitimizing function in the society by providing standards
of thought and conduct and by creating myths to foster the existing dominant ways
of doing business. Thus, ethics should be addressed and discussed within the
confines of the organized structure and activities of the political, cultural
and economical marketplace.
o Business
or organizational or any kind of ethics include every aspect of production,
distribution and consumption/use in industrial activities.
o Production,
distribution and use/consumption relations (e.g., wage policies, working
conditions, worker rights, and working hours) are important ethical issues to
be discussed.
o Human
rights, right to organize, right to work, freedom of speech, freedom of
assembly and freedom of thought should also be considered as ethics issue.
o All
workers, including information workers and knowledge workers should have a
labor union. Having the union is an
ethical practice. Therefore, destroying the unions or setting obstacles on them
are unethical.
o Auto-censorship
(in the mass media) mostly means auto-control that enhances the interest of the
dominant forces instead of the public interest. This is unethical.
o The
concepts like “wise use”, “family controlled use of internet and television”,
“educating the consumer” and “content rating” are good examples of ethics that
are ethics of malpracticizing industry that blames the victims for their
preferences and behaviors.
o Definition
of social responsibility should include the “content rating” and “controlled
production” for the “free/global market.” No one is free to produce as he/she wishes.
Such freedom is unethical.
o “Clear
Net social responsibility” should be addressed.
o Public
trust should not be based on the forged images that redefine the realities of
life. This is unethical.
o Media
ethics that are reduced to the prescribed, but hardly practiced principles for
the journalists are unethical, since these ethical principles blame the working
people (journalists) and ignore the real issues of ethics.
o The
prevailing issues on the ethics in media focus mostly on the ethical nature of
the content of the media products. This is an extremely narrow approach to the ethics
in media industry.
o The
nature of the media content mostly reduced to the quality and morality (mostly
sex and violence). It is very convenient to think about media ethics in terms
of only sex and violence. Such thinking itself is unethical.
o The
media industry provides (sells) “gadgets” for the audience for “an educated and
responsible viewing.”
o Instead
of providing gadgets and content rating mechanisms, the media industry should
be socially responsible by not producing the junk.
o Hence,
ethics in media issue is primarily the issue of the content production and
distribution, not the use/exposure issue.
o Social
control of the industrial practices are considered as against the freedom (censorship). Thus,
self- censorship or auto-control is provided as the solution. It is also said that the media should set their
own ethics principles of conduct and production. This is also unethical. The
media today are as they are, because of the self-censorship, auto-control and
responsible production. So, they can not be different than what they are at the
present time.
o Dominant
ethics in media can not be different than or dissimilar to the general business
ethics in the country.
o Media
ethics are related with the structure of international market and the mode of
dominant relations of this market. Thus, the issue of media ethics should be considered
and investigated as integral part of the dominant ways of international
economical and political relations of production, distribution (structure of
wealth) and consumption.
o Media
ethics is related with the creation of recreating the facts of life, thus, with
shaping the human consciousness. That’s why, ethics should be studied not only
as a subject of moral codes and practices, but also as an issue of mind management through
mediated representations by communications media.
o Human
beings who are subjected to mediated representations of modern communication
technologies that are used to further the dominant interests are far beyond
being mere “audiences”; they are both produced and producing ones.
o There
are always auto-control or auto-censorship in decision making and reproducing in daily life.
Auto- censorship or auto-control is not and can not be independent of daily production relations. Unfortunately,
the auto-control is presented as if it is the only viable alternative to the
censorship organs of the state. Such presentation creates forged agenda and
fake solutions. Auto-control cannot be real solution for the problems of ethics
in media, because the existing media products and relations are themselves also
end-products of a dominant auto-control. If there are ethical problem in the
media products and relations, it also means that there are problems in the nature of auto-control.
Auto- control should be handled and studied as a problem rather than a solution.
o Similarly,
the content rating systems in television and movies are not real solutions,
rather mechanisms of (a) legitimization of industrial practices, (b) identifying
wrong culprits, (c) providing solutions that are not real solutions, (d)
blaming the victims and freeing the industries from responsibility and (e)
stimulating interest for viewing and consumption.
