Three ways to fight corruption in the media

Three ways to fight corruption in the media

When consuming news media: buyers beware. Although a free and independent media is a key ingredient of democracy, this has never meant the media is unbiased. Most people know where on the political spectrum their chosen information source sits. In the UK, the Daily Mirror is a Labour paper; the Telegraph is Conservative. In the U.S. Fox News, despite its ‘free and fair’ tagline is known to be home to the (reactionary) right. 

It’s only when one particular bias stifles free speech or blurs the line between real news and sensationalism that the most important function of the fourth estate, holding those in power to account, is put in jeopardy. There are two scenarios where this can limit the media’s watchdog role: when independent press is censored, as in a dictatorship, or powerful commercial interests muzzle criticism.  

The radical transformation of the media landscape in the digital era has brought about a scenario where the latter scenario is beginning to undermine the purpose, if not the power, of a free press. With a drastic drop in sales of print media, and an increasingly saturated market in which traditional journalism competes with less formal or professional reporting, media outlets are increasingly looking to alternative ways to maintain market share and attention spans through the use of sensationalism and frantic news hunting. 

Here we consider three ways in which journalism is at risk from corruption and what can be done to tackle its destructive influence on our news media:

1) Media Ownership 

The ownership of media outlets – whether state-run, privately owned, or public service broadcasters – is a crucial factor for the independence and integrity of the media. 
Where media companies are formally owned by the state, the government may exercise a strong influence, censoring stories, stifling investigations into high profile cases and generally compromising the neutrality of reporting. 

Privately owned media companies carry equally significant challenges as they can become beholden to certain public figures, individuals or corporate interests, who use them to promote a certain image of themselves, their opponents, or a certain issue or product. Concentrated ownership is most worrisome; where one or few individuals or firms own the majority of media companies in a country, heavily undermining neutrality and pluralism. 

Governments must create and enforce legal frameworks to promote transparency of ownership of the media through active disclosure of ownership structures to independent media regulators or authorities. This information should be available to the public in a clear and accessible way. 

Some innovative initiatives are being piloted by journalists themselves, such as by Reporters without Borders in Colombia, whose database enables the public to examine the concentration of media ownership and related conflicts of interest by publishing and analysing data about media companies' holdings and beneficial owners. 

Austria is considered as an example of good practice in regulating media ownership. A 2011 Austrian media law permits anyone to look up the owners of print, broadcast and online media. Media companies are obliged to disclose the information directly to the public and report details of their owners, including information on all shareholdings, beneficial owners and those with indirect interests and control. 

2) Funding and non-transparent advertising 

Financing models are closely connected to the issue of ownership. In both instances of public and private ownership, the media sector’s growing reliance on non-traditional sources of revenue (i.e. not physical sales) makes it vulnerable to undue influence through new funding sources. Whether state subsidies or private contribution, media companies’ reliance on funding streams tied to special interests is a real challenge to the integrity of their journalism.  

The growing recourse of media outlets to non-transparent advertising is an area of great concern. Searching for alternative revenue streams, many media companies enter into agreements with public relations agencies, government bodies or advertising companies to publish advertisements or promotional material disguised as editorials or other pieces of news. 

In Macedonia and Serbia, the government is one of the largest advertisers, using taxpayer money in ways that can undermine media plurality by funding media outlets with a pro-government slant.

To combat this, governments and relevant authorities such as media oversight bodies and tax offices must oblige media companies to disclose their financial information, especially regarding their sources of income. 

3) Integrity of journalists' work

Besides nontransparent advertising, corruption in the media sector can also be carried out by journalists, editors, and other actors. Lack of professional standards due to limited resources, low quality control, low salaries and technical capacity are likely to influence the ethical framework of media institutions. 

As the main stakeholders in this process, media companies have a central role in promoting media integrity. They should be the main drivers of promoting integrity and transparency.  

There are a variety of ways they can do this.  Media outlets can provide journalists and staff with adequate ethics and integrity training, and establish internal integrity systems with clear codes of conduct with policies regulating conflicts of interest, gifts and due diligence for advertising decisions. Sanctions for non-compliance and whistleblower protection policies can also help promote good practice. 

Ultimately, the sustainability of journalism, especially investigative journalism, rests upon a reputation for integrity, ethical conduct and credibility.

This article is an adaptation from one of our Helpdesk Answers - find the original answer here

By Mariana Sosa Cordero

For any press enquiries please contact press@transparency.org

Latest

Support Transparency International

Blog: Gender and corruption: where do we go from here?

While corruption and gender have become increasingly prominent on the global agenda, and it’s increasingly recognized that anti-corruption measures are central to reducing the gender gap, the pace of change has so far been glacial. Urgent action is needed, but is sorely lacking.

Blog: Verifying the beneficial owner of companies. Why and how.

While existing rules emphasise the need for accurate, reliable and up-to-date beneficial ownership information, verification of information provided by companies is often minimal, when it happens at all.

Troika Laundromat signals a different kind of financial crisis

The Troika Laundromat investigation shines a spotlight on a cast of new and familiar characters in the ongoing saga surrounding flows of dirty money through the world’s financial system.

الأبعاد الخطيرة للتعديلات الدستورية المقترحة في مصر

يتأهب نواب البرلمان المصري للمصادقة على سلسلة من التعديلات الدستورية، التي ستؤدي في حال تمريرها إلى ترسيخ مزيد من السلطة بيد الرئيس، وتنصيب الجيش مجددا كأعلى سلطة في البلاد.

The alarming message of Egypt’s constitutional amendments

Parliamentarians in Egypt look set to approve a series of constitutional amendments this week that, if passed, would consolidate power in the office of the president, while restoring the military as the ultimate authority in the country.

Восточная Европа и Центральная Азия: слабая система сдержек и противовесов

Индекс восприятия коррупции (ИВК) за этот год представляет печальную картину касательно мер по борьбе с коррупцией в Восточной Европе и Центральной Азии. За несколько лет в этом регионе был достигнут очень незначительный прогресс в борьбе с коррупцией.

الشرق الأوسط وشمال أفريقيا: انتشار الفساد في ظل ضعف المؤسسات وتراجع الحقوق السياسية

كشف مؤشر مدركات الفساد 2018 عن صورة قاتمة لواقع الشرق الأوسط وشمال أفريقيا حيث أن معظم بلدان المنطقة قد أخفقت في مكافحة الفساد على الرغم من أن قلة قليلة من البلدان قد أحرزت تقدما تدريجيا.

Afrique subsaharienne:Les régimes non démocratiques sapent les efforts de lutte contre la corruption

L’Indice de perception de la corruption (IPC) présente cette année un tableau bien sombre de l’Afrique : seuls 8 pays sur 49 obtiennent un score supérieur à 43 sur les 100 points que compte l’Indice. Malgré l’engagement pris par les dirigeants africains de faire de 2018 l’Année africaine de lutte contre la corruption, les avancées concrètes se font encore attendre.

Trouble at the top: why high-scoring countries aren’t corruption-free

For the third year running, the top seven countries in the Corruption Perceptions Index 2018 consist of the four Nordic nations – Denmark, Finland, Sweden and Norway – plus New Zealand, Singapore and Switzerland. Yet that doesn’t mean that these countries are corruption-free.

Social Media

Follow us on Social Media