Professional news organizations and associations are seeking—or forced?— to rewrite their codes of ethics in the face of overwhelming change to journalism. From the start, citizens should be invited to participate alongside professionals in a searching discussion of how to redefine journalism ethics, writes media ethicist Stephen Ward.
Following the controversy of prominent journalists Peter Mansbridge and Rex Murphy accepting payments from members of the oil industry, CBC has made several changes to its policies about paid speeches.
There is no magic formula for ensuring a civil exchange of relevant ideas and opinions. Setting the ground rules, monitoring the conversation and being engaged in it can go long way to achieving that goal, says a report by the Canadian Association of Journalists’ ethics advisory committee.
Setting the ground rules, monitoring the conversation and being engaged in it can go long way to achieving that goal, says a report by the Canadian Association of Journalists’ ethics advisory committee.
The new Torstar Business Code of Conduct says employees have to act in the best interests of the company. But, as journalism ethics professor David Swick asks, can Star journalists always act in the best interest of Torstar? What if, for example, a reporter or columnist sees the need to criticize the parent company in…
CTV Vancouver won six television awards at the RTDNA BC Region Awards. News1130 led in the radio category with five wins.
The Yukon News won six first-place awards in its circulation category, including best all-around newspaper and best editorial page.
The five-year-old, Calgary-based publication won the magazine of the year award while its publisher and editor, Janine Vangool, won the editor of the year award.
Steve Paikin, the host of The Agenda, is asking for advice—his son is seeking a Liberal nomination in the 2015 federal election. Given this conflict of interest, Paikin asks how he should approach his election reporting.
The Canadian Association of Journalists ethics committee looked at whether journalists have a responsibility to discuss the potential consequences of an interview when dealing with vulnerable sources, and if that could be done without undermining journalists’ duty to serve the public interest by providing it with important information. Esther Enkin reports.