A free and independent media is one of the principal vehicles for informing the public about corrupt activity. By investigating and reporting on corruption, the media provides an important counterpoint to the abuse of entrusted power for private gain, shedding light on the wrongdoings of public office holders and corporate executives alike. As such, it significantly contributes to the basis of knowledge with which citizens can hold both public and private institutions to account.

A functioning, independent media is also related to effective civil society action against corruption. The impact of civil society is dependent not only on reliable information, but also on the existence of means to disseminate its opinions and raise issues of public concern. Moreover, the media has the editorial capacity to promote the anti-corruption positions of civil society groups. In countering corruption, the media therefore plays a dual role: its spotlight directly revealing corruption while, at the same time, illuminating the anti-corruption efforts of other actors.

The media is, however, vulnerable to attempts to curb its effectiveness in countering corruption. It faces numerous external threats to its freedom to report on corrupt practices, particularly when such reporting is at odds with powerful political and business interests. The role of the media can also be distorted by corruption within the industry itself. By averting the public's gaze from where it is most needed, the damage incurred by such practice to the media's integrity and independence can be far-reaching. Concentration of media ownership poses additional risks to the media's ability to report on corruption. Where the media is concentrated in the hands of a few, conflicts between the owners' interests and the principles of independent reporting invariably arise.

Measures to optimise the role of the media in countering corruption need to address a range of factors including not only the political and legal environment in which reporting takes places, but also economic and professional issues such as media ownership and journalist training.

The following pages address the role of public and private institutions that report news, including print (newspapers, magazines), broadcast (radio stations, television stations, television networks), and internet-based media. For brevity, these institutions are collectively referred to as "the media".

The media can play both a direct and indirect role in countering corruption. Whereas the former usually relates to the breaking of a particular news story, or set of stories, bringing corruption to public attention, the latter is linked to the broader social impact of the existence of an independent media, where such exists.

One of the most dramatic ways in which the media contributes to the fight against corruption is when news reports exposing misdeeds lead to the forced resignation of public office holders. In Latin America alone, the media has in recent years played a central role in exposing corruption resulting in the ousting of four national leaders: President Bucaram of Ecuador, President Perez of Venezuela, President Collor of Brazil, and President Fujimori of Peru (Sources: Stapenhurst, The Media's Role in Curbing Corruption, 2000 & Freedom House, Press Release, April 30, 2001). In the Philippines, meanwhile, the investigations of journalists into the unexplained wealth of President Joseph Estrada played a crucial role in his eventual downfall (Source: Møller and Jackson, Journalistic Legwork that Tumbled a President, 2002).

Frequently, news reports can prompt official investigations or proceedings into allegations of public or private sector corruption, thus providing an important impulse to official bodies charged with investigating or prosecuting corrupt acts. Due to their importance to the public interest, such investigations themselves often become the focus of subsequent news reports. By reporting on such matters, the media can serve to reinforce the effectiveness of formal proceedings by championing the commitment of those working in the public interest. Alternatively, when official proceedings are conducted in an inept or obstructive manner, the media can push for future reform by highlighting legal and institutional inadequacies.

In addition to its direct role in countering corruption, the very existence of an independent media can have an indirect impact on the instance of corruption in a particular society. A tradition of hard-hitting investigative journalism may, for instance, place an indirect check on corruption that might otherwise take place in the absence of informed public debate. In the United States, it is often argued that coverage of the Watergate scandal solidified the role of investigative reporting in uncovering political misdeeds (Source: American Journalism Review, Watergate Revisited, Aug.-Sept. 2004). Similarly, when the media fosters debate in a way that encourages members of the public to become politically active, it serves as an indirect counterweight to the lack of mass participation in politics often associated with high levels of corruption.

One of the media's most significant indirect contributions to the fight against corruption is to be found in its symbiotic relationship with civil society. Civil society is the realm in which citizens associate according to their own interests, striving neither for political nor economic power. The legitimacy of civil society lies in its pursuit of the common good and, as such, it is uniquely placed to address corruption and maladministration. Its effectiveness in doing so, however, depends not only upon the existence of reliable information upon which to base its actions, but also on the availability of means to disseminate its views. Through the provision of accurate, up-to-date information and a platform for the free expression of opinion, an independent media can significantly contribute to effective civil society action in the anti-corruption field.

Likewise, the existence of an active civil society is integral to the maintenance of those conditions in which an independent media can thrive. Without the constant vigilance and activism of civil society groups working towards social, political and economic justice, special interests may seek to encroach upon the media's ability to report openly and freely. Operating hand-in-hand, the media and civil society can therefore mutually reinforce their respective roles in countering corruption.

Despite measures taken in many countries to ensure media independence, many factors continue to weaken the media's potentially powerful contribution to the fight against corruption. The most significant challenges to the media as an effective anti-corruption watchdog are highlighted below.

Political resistance
Political resistance to media independence can take a variety of forms and is invariably related to attempts to block public scrutiny of the misdeeds of those in power. It can range from simple disregard for transparency obligations or discrimination by authorities against particular journalists and news outlets, to outright abuse by a government of its legal and regulatory powers in an attempt to intimidate or censor the media.

In countries where the affairs of government are shrouded in secrecy, journalists often face considerable physical risk when they embark on investigations that could lead to the exposure of corruption. Other than discouraging the use of tools associated with investigative journalism, repeated incidents of violence against journalists can result in strong self-censorship, with reporters and editors refraining from criticising government for fear of retribution.

Repressive legal framework
A related obstacle is that of the existence of laws and regulations that hinder the media's ability to effectively perform its watchdog function. Although Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that "everyone should have the [...] freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers [...], through any media [...] of his choice", the reality is that many national legal frameworks continue to place restrictions on the fundamental rights to know and to publish. The most common grounds for such restrictions relate to the privacy rights of individual citizens or private companies and to matters of national security.

In the wake of the events of September 11th 2001, new regulations in a number of countries have sought to further limit access to information in the apparent interest of enhancing the authorities' ability to counter terrorism. Though some limited restrictions on such grounds may be justified, the media is all too often faced with draconian libel and official secrets laws that serve only to shield public actors from unwanted attention.

Lack of an independent judiciary
Even in countries where progressive press freedom and access to information laws are already in place, the media's role in curbing corruption can be curtailed by the lack of an independent judiciary. If newsrooms are to go about their business without fear of repression, they require reasonable guarantees that 'enabling' press laws will be equitably enforced by the courts. The independence of the judiciary is therefore a prerequisite for the existence of an independent media. A legal system under political influence cannot be expected to produce equitable rulings in cases which, for instance, involve the withholding of information by state agencies.

Concentration of media ownership
A lack of diversity of media ownership threatens to stifle the freedom of expression essential to informed public debate. The classic situation in which media owners interfere with their journalists' activities is when the government itself owns all or most of a country's television, radio and press. Indeed, evidence collected from 97 countries suggests that state-owned media tend, in general, to be less effective than private media in monitoring government activities (Source: World Bank Group, World Development Report 2002).

While many countries are now moving away from excessive state-ownership of the media, privatisation has often brought its own dangers. In Latin America and the Caribbean, where levels of state-ownership are relatively low, the media is often restrained by a combination of highly concentrated private ownership and restrictive regulations. In Brazil, concentration is reinforced by a regulatory regime whereby politicians regularly obtain access to broadcast licences. (Source: Transparency International, Global Corruption Report 2003).

In other parts of the world, there is concern that large media conglomerates are undermining coverage of corruption stories deemed damaging to their corporate interests. These concerns revolve around both the might and apparent weakness of such corporations which, though capable of quashing news reports across a variety of national, even international media, may do so because their pursuit of profit leaves them vulnerable to external pressure in a highly competitive global market.

Unethical journalist conduct
Media workers themselves sometimes engage in corrupt activity. This is often - though not exclusively - the result of the difficult financial circumstances in which many media organisations find themselves. In many developing countries, print and broadcast media often run at a loss, resulting in extremely low journalist salaries. This can - and often does - make reporters vulnerable to attempts to undermine their professional integrity, particularly when these attempts are made by unscrupulous media owners.

In the developed world too, media independence is put at risk by the well-established practice of giving and accepting gifts from a variety of public and private sources. While such practices may not in themselves be corrupt, in the absence of clear policies on gift-taking, the receipt of favours can have a direct impact on the ability of the media to report objectively on corrupt activity.

Poor journalistic standards
Inadequate newsroom budgets can result in a less ominous, though equally significant, obstacle to fulfilment of the media's anti-corruption function: that of poor journalistic standards. A lack of financial and human resources has a twofold effect on the ability of the media to produce high-quality material. Firstly, it minimises (or, in some cases, entirely excludes) the possibility of conducting the extended research and investigation required for professional coverage. Secondly, it means that journalists frequently do not receive adequate on-the-job training, particularly in the specialised skills required for successful investigative journalism. At an even more basic level, however, poor journalistic and editorial practice resulting in factual errors or politically slanted coverage can have a profound impact on perceptions of the media's integrity.

A range of both external and internal obstacles therefore confronts the media in its anti-corruption role. As such, a multi-faceted approach is necessary to adequately address the many challenges described.