Ethics of journalism;

Do they exist, or are they being dreamt of??

Ethics are best defined if they’re differed from morals. However, that doesn’t mean ethics and morals can be contradicted. The end of Kevin Carter (1961 – 1994) – the photographer who got the Pulitzer Prize 1993 – is the best example of this fact [1]. In my point of view, ethics are best done when morals are considered. This is one point. Two, ethics must take into consideration the age we’re living in; ethically and practically speaking. What do I mean by ethically and practically speaking?

For example, it’s too late now for old-fashioned journalism to be considered as a real journalism. This kind of news organizations have to change themselves; or they’ll face the possibility of “being out of business”! Couple of decades ago, local TVs, Radios, newspapers etc…were the major sources of news. Today, we have; websites and their multi-services such as: online services, stream, RSS, SMS etc... These tools are very simple for users to use, but on the other hand, they are very complicated to be competed! I mean, the amount of information they deliver is great, and audience, who is the main definer of the concept of “the best”, will always look for the quality. Maybe some old-fashioned local journalism has the privilege of the best local coverage, U.S.A people, for example, are somehow focusing more on their local issues, but who guarantees the next coming era? Will audience still be interested mainly in local news? This revolution is just in its infancy! I do think it will grow to be something much different from what we’re facing now.

According to the first definition of the word “Ethic” in the Longman dictionary which says: “ethic is a general idea or belief that influences people's behavior and attitudes”, I think, globalizations even changed our general ideas and beliefs!

It changed them by applying some kind of “would-be” substitutions to life aspects! Some theories think that journalist carrier is endangered! One point can be shown in this quotation: “This is particularly important to journalists who face the danger that their profession will be so technology-driven that the reasons for doing journalism are forgotten” [2]. On the other hand, we have the other point of view: “the role of the professional journalist will be secure in the future…” [3].

I said in the introduction, I don’t know what’s coming next in this speedy development to determine how journalism will look like in the future! Of course, I don’t think a robot can be a journalist! But, maybe journalists will loose some of their importance as the best source for telling a story. This shortness may come because the concept of a journalist nowadays is very hard to define. If we noticed the last quotation; only the role of ‘professional’ journalist will be secure! But, who is a ‘professional’ journalist, and who is not?

Western free press considers its journalists the only type of journalists exists! Authoritarian nations’ journalists, market communicators and public relation practitioners object against such a discrimination! With no basic standards to define, it’s hard to tell who’s right, and who’s wrong.

And this is, by the way, the second definition of the word “ethic” in the Longman dictionary: “ethics are moral rules or principles of behavior for deciding what is right and wrong!”

Now, what is right? And what is wrong? Is the right now will be the right in the future?? What kind of ethics do we need to develop the ultimate goal of journalism ‘to tell the truth’?

Because rightness is relevant from one nation to another, I think the best way to answer this question is by generalization. First, there are certain codes of conducts mentioned in every constitution of every nation; such as freedom of press; for example. Also, there are ideals are mentioned in university books as ultimate goals to be achieved. Objectivity is a good example here, though “As a practical manner, objectivity is an illusion [4]”. And the rest are merely simple facts! However, none of the above mentioned are followed by all, and some of them aren’t followed at all!

The first journalistic ethical standard is credibility. It’s just a simple fact. I consider it the highest ethical standard that differentiates news agencies work!
Al Hora [5] News Channel; for example, which started broadcasting to the Arab audience right after Iraq war; has every standard anyone can imagine! It has reporters all over the world, almost unlimited budget, technology, good programs; but it doesn’t have this characteristic “Credibility”, because, everyone knows that it’s U.S.A made to defeat Al Jazeera! So, it may last as much as U.S.A wants, but still no one will have his news from it; not only because it’s fighting Al Jazeera – Al Arabyia is competing Al Jazeera and it has a recognized audience – but also because Al Hora is related to U.S.A administration policy and propaganda. Credibility needs something concrete to be base on; “this may take years, but it could be destroyed within few seconds”.

The second one is the condition that Robert L. Stevenson focused on as the only way to secure the future of a journalist, which is ‘professionalism’. In fact, this concept is very vague and huge. From my point of view, professionalism basically includes: belief in journalism as a way to show the truth, objectivity in sense of showing all sides’ perspectives and points of views, fighting to get the news, highly educational background, “avoid misread and misunderstanding the foreign contexts [6]”. There are other aspects of course, like, skeptism, creativity – only in the ways of getting a story; not in stories themselves of course –, determination of ‘newsworthy’ etc...! How should we achieve professionalism in individuals, and in news organizations?
We need to have highly trained journalists to achieve it. Training journalism universities, institutions, and even in news organizations themselves; all over the world must be focus on the common mistakes – so to speak – that always face journalists and reporters. After all, you don’t know what’s right, until either you commit, or somebody commits the wrong! The third one is mentioned in every constitution; which is freedom of press. Stevenson said: “ if press freedom is defined as freedom from government control, the United states has the freest system in the world, but even there, the right is not absolute!” Yes, he is right! Let me illustrate one simple example happened two days ago! Tayseer Alony, who worked as a reporter for Al Jazeera during Afghanistan war, is sentenced to 7 years in jail in Spain – he has a Spanish nationality –! He has a record in the number charges; from being Al Qayda member, planning terrorist acts etc….! All of sudden, they dropped all the charges; including being Al Qaydah member! Still one left was about the circumstances he interviewed Osama Bin Laden during Afghanistan war. However, when a Spinach court issued its judgment on him, he was convicted with “cooperation with a terrorist cell!” The worse part is that; the court in its judgment said: there were classified evidences [7] prove that Alony is convicted, but no one is authorized to see it; not even his lawyers because of “national security”! Which reminds us, of course, of how “national security” is really “vaguely defined” [8]. Usually courts determine what’s right and what’s wrong! This is a court of a “free world country[9]!” So, I don’t think freedom of press really exists anywhere, because politics in a way or another still affect its independency.

Depending on all above-mentioned, what future do we see? What end do we have? And what is right, or at least; since “the right is not absolute”, what is wrong?
“People will still trust journalists as a truth teller”, so let’s not disturb this trust. Real journalists, form my point of view, are those who definitely know what ethics they should follow, and what kind of reporting they should drop. An international code of ethics of journalism will be a failure, just like what happened when George Bush wanted to create a global legal system that includes freedom press [10]. It will be a failure because of the argument will start about who will implement it? Who is authorized? U.N is doll in U.S.A bed, thanks to Vetos! I.T.U is pretty old to do a modern mission. Journalists’ organizations, I don’t believe in their ability to fight “big guys”; such as U.S.A, and the Western world! With all do respect to all, we can’t trust any agency to control the implementation of journalism ethics! So, I think it’s an individual task most of all to be implemented by journalists themselves. How and When? We can’t wait forever to see what will happen in technology development. Anyway, it’s not an option. However, for those who don’t want to, remember, only ‘professional journalists will survive’, ethically speaking.
-----------------------------------------------------
[1] Philip Seib (2002) The Global Journalist, Chapter 6, page 120.
[2] Philip Seib (2002) The Global Journalist, Chapter 1, page 3.
[3] De Beer, A& Merrill, J (2004) Global Journalism: Topical Issues and Media systems, Chapter 5, page 88. [4] Philip Seib (2002) The Global Journalist, Chapter 1, page 8.
[5] Al Hora: means in Arabic: the Free.
[6] De Beer, A& Merrill, J (2004) Global Journalism: Topical Issues and Media systems, Chapter 11, page 153.
[7] Al Jazzera website: http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/F45D0B51-F71D-4490-9A31-E858E22CBA6B.htm
[8] Philip Seib (2002) The Global Journalist, Chapter 1, page 4.
[9] A quotation from George W. Bush statements.
[10] De Beer, A& Merrill, J (2004) Global Journalism: Topical Issues and Media systems, Chapter 5, page 76.

“Freedom, Justice and Equality”

French Revolution, and French Riots!

Imagine yourself living in very terrible circumstances. You don’t have equal opportunity in life with the ‘elite’. You work harder and harder and your future is still unknown. Your father is getting older and older. He just sits by the door smoking as if this smoke is the only thing in life he could achieve! You’re almost unemployed, and if you got lucky, you are 100% underpaid! What is the solution?

First idea, as Arabs, comes to us is to immigrate! Immigration at this point turned to be the only solution, the magic lamp that will achieve our legitimate ultimate goal of ‘suitable life’. Can you imagine that life itself has become a goal to strive for in the underdeveloped countries?!

I’ll talk about some personal experience! I didn’t face that, but I’m seeing it every minute. One of the examples; I had a friend; his name is Rami. He is Christian by the way! He lived in one of these countries! If you saw him 15 years ago, you’ll surely think that this guy will be the president of his country! He had everything a kid dreamt of; he was strong, clever, and so thinking organized. His father was an educated worker, his mother used to sell clothes ‘smoked clothes’! His future was unknown, until his brother went to ‘the dream land’ USA to study Medicine! However, as always, he got married there and started a carrier in a Petrol Station! Now, tow of his brothers followed him there, and they’re living the Arabic Dream in American! The mother and the father stayed in their country and are supported almost totally by the brothers!

I have a question, in this case, who is to be blamed? The people who are just trying to have a better life? The foreign governments that are making it more and more difficult for foreigners to immigrate? Or the national government that makes life a living-hell?

I can’t blame any! The goal of man in life is to live, so, why can’t we make it a better life! The goal of any foreign government is to protect its people. And, of course, we can’t blame a government from underdeveloped countries! Yes, they’re corrupted, but, I don’t have any other solution, and I don’t want another Iraq in my region ‘hopefully’!! Beside, any talk about internal change will be, at least, a long-term solution!

Now, considering the situation that happened in France one month ago; this question rose up again; who is to be blamed? However, I put the above-mentioned introduction in order to compare the Arabic dream of a good life, to the African-Arabic dream in France; which has the same goal, with a total different path!

During the 50s of the last centaury, France brought workers from its colonies in Africa. These workers were stronger than French men, and they were also much less paid! They built buildings, bridges and participated in the whole reconstruction process!

However, they were not educated and they started to create their special community; according to their religion, culture and social life. That doesn’t mean that they didn’t go through and learn from the French culture; of course not! They went into it, deeply! It’s the culture of freedom, justice and equality, isn’t it??

After these days, a problem in the French society started to take place. These people are not only workers to work! They are also human, who need rights. For example, they do need equal opportunities in life; according, of course, to their skills! They’re not asking for something huge! They just want to ‘share’. Is it that big??
The real problem is in some French people mentality is that, for sorrow, they don’t see this simple fact! They just think that these people are only foreigners no more no less. They’re trouble-makers. They are mugging, killing and doing all the bad things! If anything happened, the first accused is the “African or Arabic” guy, unless evidences and eye-witnesses say otherwise!

After September the 11th, it’s been easier to Nicolas Sarkozy, who is believed by the way to be the next president after Jacques Chirac, to use bad word against these ‘slams people’! He didn’t even care what kind of impact it will create for people who are having serious problems as second-hand goodies in this society!! French Riots were not totally the fault of who did it! They were also the fault of who helped it to happen ‘maybe on purpose’! That was obvious, to me, with the racist decision that Sarkozy made; to exile any suspected or accused in these riots, even if this person had the residence!! By the way, the most common way to get a residence in France is to marry a French girl! And these marriages are 99%, real marriages! What does that suppose to mean? Well, from an outsider point of view, this means that it’s a kind of purification to the French society! It’s a kind of discrimination between first class person, and a second class one who is not even welcomed in the society at all!

This mentality is to be blamed for these riots! It’s not about Islam or Christianity, for those who believe in the conspiracy theory of September the 11th; it’s about a new Hitlerism in thinking and acting! Sarkozy, to me, represents that tendency in France. I’m really pessimistic about the future if he got to be the president.

On the other hand, I can’t deny this fact; France once was the light of ‘equality’ in the world. These people, who think in Hitlerism, are likely to be reminded of Louis the sixteenth! He had the same thought about the poor, that they were not noble. However, nobility in itself was achieved by the French revolution. I’m not advocating for a revolution, of course not, I’m just drawing the attention of Mr. Sarkozy, and the like, that these people you called barbarians, are more noble that any discriminator and racist in the world; including yourself! To me, even animals are more noble than any racist!!

Arabic Proverb: "Friendship is an unlimited Treasure"

What a True Friend IS?

In my last post, I did make a mistake by generalizing that I don’t have friends here! I confess and admit that I shouldn’t put it that way. However, for my dear friends in class, who felt bad about what I said.

Please, try to look at it from this point of view. Allow me to introduce you to the theory of what a friend is?

- A friend is someone feels your pain, and considers it his ‘or hers’.
-A friend is someone helps you when you are there, and when you are NOT there!
- A friend is someone covers your back, even without your knowledge.
- A friend is someone who doesn’t have a bad timing when it comes to you.
- A friend is someone understands you, better than most people do.

- A friend is someone saves your friendship from everything, even from yourself.
- A friend is someone if you slapped him ‘or her’ on the face, before he ‘or she’ reacts, he ‘or she’ will ask ‘why’?

- A friend doesn’t act ‘friendship’, he ‘or she’ just feels it!
- A friend is a whole family to you: he ‘or she’ is the mother, the father, the brother, the wife, the son and the bodyguard!

- A friend is not a ‘bodyguard’, he ‘or she’ is a soul guard!
- A friend is the only place to go, when you don’t have any place to go.
- A friend is a partner in joy, sorrows and love.
- A friend is the only one that you feel him ‘or her’ safe to say anything about everything.
- A friend is the one that knows you’re not made out of diamond, but feels you so.
- A friend is the one, if you take from him ‘or her’ everything, he ‘or she’ will feel sorry for not having more to offer!
- A friend is the lap to cry if you’re sad, the party if you’re lonely and the beauty maker if everything is ugly.
- In short, a friend is another eternal free spot you can get from this life!

Does such a person exist in life? Do I believe in it?

Mohammad the prophet (May Allah has his blesses and prayers upon his soul) existed in this life. Jesus Christ existed in life! Mother Teresa existed in life! Why not?

Life to me is very short. I know that I’m going to die and it’s all a matter of when? Maybe I’ll die tomorrow, maybe in some years, maybe before I post this article! I’d love to live my life to the fullest, To enjoy every gift I can get from God who made my life for me!

Lucky me, I have some free spots in the life of others, but I never get enough! It’s the only legitimized greed, and in this concept, I’m the most vicious greedy in the world! I love to have more friends than anyone, but, with people who meet this concept of the above mentioned points! It’s not a fairytale or imaginary view, it’s how I’m!

Show me your friendship, and try me! Do you dare??

It's Snowing Here in Orebro!

I’m astonished! Is it the white color? Is it the relief I feel when I see it? It’s not the first time I see snow! I lived in Syria and France enough time to see snow tens of times in my life.

I have one explanation. Snow to me is the truth. It’s the feel of truth I miss. I feel it like a friend came from the sky to share with me.

Let me face it now, I don’t have true friends here. People are nice, but are they friends? I don’t think so. Or at least, I’m not sure.

At least, I’m sure snow will listen. I can talk forever, and be sure that it will never feel bored.

Sometimes, we need miracles to happen. We need something to come from the sky to help us.

Sometimes, we say rubbish without knowing what it means, but we do feel it! I do!

I’ll stop talking to you now. Snow is waiting!