5. The rise ofThe rise of ““impartialityimpartiality””??
Defined as:
• A “sound practice [that] makes clear distinction
between news reports and expressions of opinion.
News reports should be free of opinion or bias of any
kind”
• American Society of Newspaper Editors, 1923 in Allan,
2004: 22
5
7. Canada, 2013
Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC)
Discovered Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) was hiring
junior employees to train temp staff to replace
themselves
Canadaland blog discovered the follow-up story
was dropped in dubious circumstances
7
8. Canada, 2013
CBC’s senior business correspondent and star
presenter, Amanda Lang, invited journalists into a
conference call dismissing the story.
Lang paid C$15,000 for public speaking events, one of
which sponsored by RBC
Lang booked to speak for the outsourcing company
hired by RBC
Lang’s partner is board member at RBC
8
12. Biased towards the Right?
12Source
• Eurosceptic
• Pro-business
• Anti-immigration
“On BBC News at Six,
business representatives
outnumbered trade
union spokespersons by
more than five to one
(11 vs 2) in 2007 and by
19 to one in 2012”
13. “To ensure that news, in whatever form, is reported with due
accuracy and presented with due impartiality”
http://stakeholders.ofcom.org.uk/broadcasting/broadcast-codes/broadca
BBC have extra guidelines
http://www.bbc.co.uk/bbctrust/our_work/other/century21.shtm
13
18. OFCOM guidance notes
Section 5 - Due Impartiality and Due Accuracy
and Undue Prominence of Views and Opinions
‘“Due” is an important qualification to the
concept of impartiality. Impartiality itself means
not favouring one side over another. “Due”
means adequate or appropriate to the subject
and nature of the programme.
18
19. OFCOM guidance notes
Section 5 - Due Impartiality and Due Accuracy and
Undue Prominence of Views and Opinions
So “due impartiality” does not mean an equal
division of time has to be given to every view, or
that every argument and every facet of every
argument has to be represented. The approach to
due impartiality may vary according to the nature
of the subject, the type of programme and
channel, the likely expectation of the audience as
to content, and the extent to which the content
and approach is signalled to the audience.
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/tv/ifi/codes/bcode/undue/
19
21. Regulation of the BBC
Abides by terms set out via:
BBC Charter (BBC Trust)
Department for Culture, Media and Sport agreement (‘the
Agreement’)
The Communications Act 2003 (“the Act”)
The Broadcasting Act 1996
Terms agreed by OFCOM and the BBC
21
22. Regulation of the BBC
‘Ofcom’s published procedures for handling
standards complaints will not apply in cases
relating to accuracy and impartiality in BBC
programmes on UK Public Services.’
Ofcom, 8/3/2007, Memorandum of Understanding,
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/csg/ofcombbc/
22
23. Addition to the MoU
5. No difficulty arises when a service/programme gives
rise to an issue of accuracy or impartiality alone: the Trust
has sole jurisdiction. But sometimes a single
service/programme gives rise to an issue both of offence
and/or harm, and accuracy
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/how-ofcom-is-run/committees/ofcom-
/
23
24. Addition to the MoU
6. In such a situation, Ofcom and the Trust have agreed
that the following approach will apply: both
organisations have jurisdiction only if the fundamental
issue satisfies three conditions:
24
25. Addition to the MoU
6. In such a situation, Ofcom and the Trust have agreed
that the following approach will apply: both
organisations have jurisdiction only if the fundamental
issue satisfies three conditions:
1. It is not an issue arising from News/news headlines or
Current Affairs content as defined in the Memorandum
of Understanding; and
25
27. Addition to the MoU
27
http://www.ofcom.org.uk/about/csg/ofcombbc/mou_addition/
28. Subsections of note
5.7 Views and facts must not be
misrepresented. Views must also be
presented with due weight over
appropriate timeframes.
28
29. Subsections of note
5.8 Any personal interest of a reporter
or presenter, which would call into
question the due impartiality of the
programme, must be made clear to the
audience
29
30. Subsections of note
5.9 Presenters and reporters (with the
exception of news presenters and
reporters in news programmes) […]
may express their own views on matters of
political or industrial controversy or matters
relating to current public policy. However
alternative viewpoints must be adequately
represented either in the programme, or in a
series of programmes taken as a whole.
30
31. What does this mean?
Criticism + praise (separate stories) = balance overall?
Strict rules governing regulation = professionalism is
always achieved?
Difficult to detect linguistic bias = overall structure of
news may be indicative?
31
32. Impartiality = counter-productive?
Traditionally, impartiality was thought to be achieved by
balancing the views of the main parties on the issues of the
day as perceived by Westminster. Today, however, for
many people, for example those concerned with the wars
in Iraq and Afghanistan, animal rights, climate change and
so on, the play of forces within parliament no longer
constitutes what they regard as politics.
Petley in Allen, 2010: 603
32
33. Chomsky (2002) The Common Good
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to
strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow
very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage
the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the
sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time
the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by
the limits put on the range of the debate.”
33
Far right?Far left?
35. 35
“This goes to the heart of science
reporting – you wouldn't have a
homeopath speaking alongside a
brain surgeon for balance, as that
would be absurd.
It's just as absurd to have a climate
sceptic for balance against the work of
the overwhelming majority of climate
scientists.”
- Steve Jones, biologist
46. Conclusion
Objectivity can never be satisfied due to the structural
limitations of strict deadlines for news and the consequences
of routinising the unexpected.
News aims for impartiality which is problematic given
that news selection and positioning means
subjective value decisions still have to be made
The ‘truth’ of news is that it is ideological
46
47. Points to consider:
Objectivity (is it possible?)
Impartiality (is it necessary?)
Balance (is it a compromise?)
What are the techniques by which the news makes itself
credible?
How easy/difficult is it to spot our biases?
47
51. Sources
S. Allan, 2004, News Culture 2nd
Edition, Berkshire: Open University Press
A. Bell, 1991, The Language of the New Media, Oxford: Blackwell.
N. Davies, 2008, Flat Earth News, London: Chatto & Windus
Stuart Hall, ‘The Whites of Their Eyes: Racist Ideologies and the Media’ in Paul Marris and Sue Thornham (eds.)
1997, Media Studies: A Reader, Dundee: Edinburgh University Press
S. Hall, C. Critcher, Jefferson, Clarke, Roberts, 1978, Policing the Crisis: Mugging, the State, Law and Order,
D. Hallin, 1986, The Uncensored War: The Media and Vietnam, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Justin Lewis, Andrew Williams and Bob Franklin, 2008, ‘Four Rumours and an Explanation: A political economic
account of journalists’ changing newsgathering and reporting practices’ in Journalism Practice, Vol 2, No 1, pp 25-
45.
M. Leapman, 1992, Treacherous Estate, London: Hodder & Stoughton.
R. K. Manoff and M. Shudson (eds.), 1986, Reading the News, New York: Pantheon.
J. Palmer, 1998, ‘News production: news values’ in A. Briggs and P. Cobley, The Media: An Introduction, Harlow:
Longman.
R. McChesney, 2001, ‘Global Media, Neoliberalism, and Imperialism’ at
http://www.monthlyreview.org/301rwm.htm
P. Schlesinger, 1987, Putting Reality Together 2nd
edition, London: Methuen.
L. V. Sigal, 1973, Reporters and Officials, Lexington, MA: D.C. Heath.
M. Shudson, 1991, ‘The sociology of news production revisited’ in J. Curran and M. Gurevitch (eds.), Mass Media
and Society, Arnold: London.
G. Tuchman, 1978, Making News, New York: Free Press.
51
Editor's Notes
So certain factors which we’ve discussed have shown that objectivity is perhaps obscure. It may be better to think in terms of impartiality which Allan defines as...
Taken from Monbiot
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
Taken from Monbiot
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
Taken from Monbiot
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
Taken from Monbiot
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
Taken from Monbiot
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jan/20/broadcasters-mouthpieces-of-elite-balanced-news-journalists
“To ensure that news, in whatever form, is reported with due accuracy and presented with due impartiality” – need to adhere to section 5 of the OFCOM code
What they mean by ‘due’ is simply – not favouring one side over the other. But this is significant because it means that the media don’t have to give equal amounts of coverage to each argument. This rule is seen as a protection system: means that news producers don’t have to give vast coverage to right-wing political groups such as the BNP (although their views may be seen to of interest to the public)?
So as a result, ‘due impartiality’ perhaps undermines some of Habermas’ ideals of the public sphere?
Steve Jones (biologist): the BBC was still wedded to an idea of "false balance" in presenting climate sceptics alongside reputable scientists.
So you could argue that objectivity is an ideal that can never be achieved – due to strict deadlines etc
