Ofcom
 |
| Image courtesy of Ofcom Wikipedia |
Ofcom is most probably one of the more well-known organisations that lay people have heard of, but it is clear that not everyone is aware of what it stands for and what it aims to accomplish. Ofcom is the communications regulator in the UK. Their focus is to regulate TV and radio sectors, fixed line telecoms (broadband services), mobiles, postal services and airwaves which wireless services operate over.
Ofcom operates and must act within Acts of Parliament, such as the Communications Act 2003 as these are the set powers and duties given by Parliament through legislation. The Communications Act states that Ofcom's principal duty is to further the interests of citizens and consumers, but their aim is also to do so whilst ensuring that competition strives. It appears that Ofcom have the burden of balancing the protection of consumers from scams, whilst promoting economic growth through company competition.
Press Complaints Commission/Independent Press Standards Organisation
 |
| Image courtesy of Press Complaints Commission Wikipedia |
The PCC was (and still is, despite being replaced by IPSO) an independent body which administers the system of self-regulation for the press. It was comprised of 17 members, the majority of which are lay members, with no connection to the newspaper and magazine industry (their attempt at being 'independent'?) and the remaining 7 are Commissioners serving as editors.
The PCC enforced the Editors' Code of Practice and dealt with issues of accuracy and privacy in reporting. They acted to maintain standards of the press through dealing with complaints in an apparently efficient and free of charge manner to promote how journalists should behave in gathering news.
Here are some of the areas in which the PCC and IPSO act within:
- Negotiating remedial action and amicable settlement for complainants;
- Issuing rulings on complaints;
- Instigating its own investigators under the Code in the public interest where appropriate;
- Conduct training seminars for working journalists and editors.
Standards that fall outside of the remit of the Commission (which appear to be merely subjective and relative):
- Question of taste and offence;
- Tone of coverage;
- Newsworthiness of stories;
- Quality of writing.
They claim to encourage complainants, because the more people who use the system, the more editors will be held accountable for their decisions. However, it is interesting that the PCC said this prior to the phone hacking scandals that occurred not too long ago, leading to the upheaval of the Leveson Inquiry. Where the perpetrators and journalists held accountable here?
National Union of Journalists
 |
| Image courtesy of National Union of Journalists Wikipedia |
The NUJ acts as a voice for journalism/journalists across the UK and represents a broad range of media professionals - from freelances and magazine journalists to online book publishing and photographers. It was formed in 1907 and now has more than 30,000 members.
Despite encompassing and promoting their Code of Conduct, I disagree that at least most of these principles have not been upheld in reality.
1. The Union is to defend press freedom when it comes under threat (this is done so clearly, publicly and so very often);
2. The Union must strive to ensure that information is disseminated and honestly conveyed in an accurate and fair manner (questionable...);
3. Journalists must do their utmost to correct harmful inaccuracies and differentiate between fact and opinion;
4. Journalists should obtain material by honest, straightforward and open means, with the exception of investigations that are both overwhelmingly in the public interest and which involve evidence that cannot be obtained by straightforward means;
5. Journalists should do nothing to intrude into anybody's private life, grief or distress unless justified by overriding consideration of the public interest (I doubt invading Milly Dowler's, or her family's privacy was in the public interest - there is also so much debate over what public interest actually is);
6. Journalists must protect the identity of sources who supply information in confidence;
7. Journalists must resist threats or any other inducements to influence, distort or suppress information and takes no unfair personal advantage of information gained in the course of his or her duties before the information is public knowledge (breach of this is why there is no longer trust in the media);
8. They must produce no material likely to lead to hatred or discrimination on the grounds of age, gender, race, colour, creed, legal status, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation.
9. They must not by way of statement, voice or appearance endorse by advertisement any commercial product or service save or the promotion of his or her own work;
10. A journalist shall normally seek the consent of an appropriate adult when interviewing or photographing a child for a story about his or her welfare (interesting use of the word 'normally');
11. Avoid plagiarism.
Of course, there are journalists and members of the media sector who stay true to the code of conduct that they believe in, however, there the typical and unfortunate fact is that those who disobeyed the rules got caught and ruined the reputation for everybody else. Will the media ever pick up its reputation and uphold it in a positive light? Who knows, because we do not know what happens behind closed doors. Why didn't these organisations do more to fulfil their aims? Some people ask, what more could they do really, providing that the complaints procedures and code of conduct were in place to be complied with? With the freedom of expression so evident in today's society, how can we really find a balance or space for the right to privacy and vice versa? It seems as though we live in a hindsight driven society, whereby organisations are continuously made to work in theory to prevent things from happening the 'next time' or 'again', yet they do not actually work practically.
"NUJ believes a journalist has the right to refuse an assignment or be identified as the author of editorial that would break the letter or spirit of the NUJ code of conduct." - National Union of Journalists
