Media and digital media ethics Uppsala 1210 2012

Media and digital media ethics Uppsala 12/10 2012 Katarzyna Płaneta-Björnskär Department of Informatics and Media Uppsala University

Sources of normative expectations (Mc. Quail, 163) � � � � Social and political theory of the press Professional theory and practice of journalism The public as citizens (public opinion) The public as audience The media market The state and its agencies Interested parties in the society affected by media

Instruments of self-regulation � Press councils � Professionalism in journalism Objective, independent, informative journalism. � Journalistic codes of ethics

Responsibility and accountability Responsibility - assigned - contratced - self-imposed Accountability - as liablity - as answerability ”To have responsibility” ”To act responsible and to take responsibility”

The occupational ideology of journalists (Deuze 2005) � Public service � Objectivity � Autonomy � Immediacy � Ethics

Most frequent principles in journalistic codes (Mc. Quail, 173) � � � Truthfulness of information Clarity of information Defence of the public rights Responsibilities in forming public opinion Standards of gathering and presenting information Respecting the integrity of the sources

A media example Code of Ethics for press, radio and television Sweden Provide accurate news • Treat rebuttals generously • Respect indivdual privacy • Be thoughtful when using pictures • Listen to every side • Be cautious with publishing names •

Objectivity challenged Political pressures Economic pressures Source tactics and strategies Technological possibilities and constrainsts Organizational possibilites and constraints Pressures by interest groups, owners and advertisers � Pressures by audiences � Dangers of journalistic routines: sources, frames&myths, newsworthiness �

Framing Entman (1993: 53): ‘[selecting] some aspects of perceived reality and mak[ing] them more salient in a communicating text, in such a way as to promote a particular definition of a problem, causal interpretation, moral evaluation, and/or treatment recommendation for the item described’.

Framing immigration & integration Politics and media – agenda crossroads? - The question of mutual influence - Event-responsive agendas � � - 5 types of frames: Multicultural Emancipation Restriction Victimization Islam as a threat

Digital media – global media ethics? �Speed and easiness – ”greased information”, easy to copy and affecting privacy � Convergence – bringing together what once was distinct � Scale and scope of communication - billions of people are active users; international and global reach; crosscultural encounters � Activity and interacitvity - ethics is not an issue for them in the media but for us; digital media becoming more ”social”; distributed responsibility � Fluidity of digital media changeable, new forms

Ethical frameworks presented by Ess (1) • Utilitarianism and consequentialism assessing the costs and benefits (short-term, long-term) • Deontology focus upon adherence to independent moral rules or duties; failing to follow one’s duty is immoral; Kantian Categorical Imperative as a rational deontology. • French moralism (teleology) oriented towards the goal of keeping social and ethical order, for a better social life

Ethical frameworks presented by Ess (2) • Feminist ethics and ethics of care: from reward-punishment to individual autonomy: pre-conventional, post-conventional morality; highlights the role of social relations, emotion and justice; eco-ethics • Virtue ethics cultivating excellence as a human being; developing practical reason and capacity for judgment; attention to emotions and learning • Confucian ethics breaking up with atomic self - we are relational beings; striving after completeness and harmony; filial piety and propriety • African ethics ubuntu idea: a person is defined through relationships with others; personhood under construction

Meta-theoretical frameworks presented by Ess Ethical absolutism/monism - universal norms valid for all - often seen as ”our” and ”others” norms • Ethical relativism - all norms are culturally dependent - no guidelines for relating different systems • Ethical pluralism - there are basic shared norms, values - these are practised and interpreted in different ways - establishes a middleground between EA and ER - dialogical process listening and accepting difference •

Case study Danish cartoons controversy, 2005 -2006 (Berthaut 2007; Miera 2009) Ø Freedom of speech - between universalism and relativism Ø Four media discourses: a) liberal fundamentalism, b) liberal pragmatism, c) dialogic multiculturalism, d) religious/ethnic fundamentalism Ø Islam as a public issue: between ‘western’ values and cultural recognition