Remarks by Brian Mangwende, ZINEF Chairperson
Members of the VMCZ Board,
Civil Society leaders here present,
Editors and Zimbabwe National Editors Forum members,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Media practitioners themselves would be the first to admit that they cannot be left to their own devices to report as they choose without any kind of oversight. If the media repeatedly flout journalism ethics and standards they lose the public’s confidence and threaten their own existence. But who should oversee what the media does? Should it be the government through statutory regulation such as AIPPA or the media industry itself through self-regulation?
Zimbabwe National Editors Forum (Zinef) supports self-regulation as the best method of promoting accountability while protecting media freedom. The majority of editors in this country believe that the media should account for any mistakes that they make while reporting on issues.
Under self-regulation the media voluntarily commit to uphold a code of ethics that they themselves draft. They establish a complaints mechanism, often called a media council or complaints commission, in our case the VMCZ, to which the public can complain about perceived breaches of the code. The independent council adjudicates on the complaints and decides upon appropriate remedies. The courts play no role in enforcing the code of practice. Compliance with the code is voluntary and the media does so out of a desire to secure the credibility of their profession and the trust of the public.
Statutory regulation enforced through such laws as AIPPA, POSA and the Official Secrets Act, can severely infringe on the right to freedom of expression. Using legislation to enforce professional standards in the media gives governments control over who says what and restricts the free flow of information.
Zinef firmly opposes such restrictions. ZINEF believes that statutory regulation simply has no place in a democracy. Self-regulation is the best way to minimise interference from the state and thus preserve editorial freedom while ensuring professional standards are maintained.
The role of the editors according to ZINEF is for editors to be at the heart of media self regulation. That they can do firstly by responding internally to complaints raised by the public. Secondly by engaging members of the public in a transparent and professional manner when dealing with a complaint raised.
The editors also have a role of cooperating with the Media Complaints Committee of the VMCZ that receives and adjudicates media complaints from the public. If the Media Complaints Committee finds that the media has infringed the code of conduct it has the power to oblige the offending media house to issue an immediate correction and apology. Editors should cooperate in that regard.
Self-regulation works best if the main sanction is simply the public shame in having broken the code. The media must publish all the findings of the committee. Does this sort of punishment really encourage responsible journalism? Yes. In short, because the media needs the public’s trust to survive. Media houses, be it press or broadcasting, want an audience. The bigger the audience the bigger the advertising revenue.
If the MCC routinely finds against a particular media house, exposing their failure to uphold journalism ethics, the media house will see their reputation plummet and their audience shrink. The very existence of the MCC keeps the media on their toes. If journalists and media owners can secure our trust by reporting responsibly and protecting our rights they will also secure their future through a loyal audience.
Complaints launched with self-regulatory bodies come at no cost, unlike court proceedings. This is a considerable advantage for the average citizen. There are beneits for complaining members of the public, such as the speedy resolution of disputes, and the satisfaction of seeing mistakes acknowledged publicly and voluntarily by the press.
In a nutshell editors support self regulation for the following reasons:
1. It preserves editorial freedom;
2. It helps to minimize state interference;
3. It promotes media quality;
4. It is evidence of media accountability;
5. It helps readers access the media.
Ladies and gentlemen with these few words
I THANK YOU
Recent Comments