JOURNALISM ETHICS IN THE V4 COUNTRIES



centercenterTable of Contents TOC \h Table of ContentsTitle PageForewordThe Case of the Czech RepublicCASE STUDY 1CASE STUDY 2:The Case of SlovakiaCASE STUDY 2CASE STUDY 3:CASE STUDY 4:CASE STUDY 5The Case of PolandThe Case of HungaryCase StudiesCase 3: Compression or manipulation?Case 4: Is a threat a threat?Case 5: Facts or Opinion?Table of ContentsTitle PageForewordThe Case of the Czech RepublicCASE STUDY 1CASE STUDY 2:The Case of SlovakiaCASE STUDY 2CASE STUDY 3:CASE STUDY 4:CASE STUDY 5The Case of PolandThe Case of HungaryCase StudiesCase 3: Compression or manipulation?Case 4: Is a threat a threat?Case 5: Facts or Opinion?JOURNALISM ETHICS IN THE V4 COUNTRIESLEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL BACKGROUND AND 20 CASE STUDIESCONTRIBUTORS:BEA BODROGIROBERT BRESTANDANIEL MODROVSKYBALAZS WEYER (EDITOR)LUDWIKA WLODEKTHANKS TO:LUKASZ GRAJEWSKIJUDIT HALPERTANDREA STOLARIKOVAGRZEGORZ PIECHOTAOLA SIGVARDSSONMACIEJ ZANIEWICZTHE PROJECT WAS FUNDED BY THE INTERNATIONAL VISEGRAD FUNDBUDAPEST, 2017FOREWORDBy Balazs Weyer, chairman of Editors’ Forum HungaryWhen we started to create an association on journalism ethics in Hungary around 2009, I was a bit shocked when I learned that Europe is full of media self-regulation institutions. Almost every country has it, except a few. And among the few, the V4 countries stand out as one big block of terra incognita of media self-regulation. I was curious, why is it available everywhere from Spain to Armenia, but not in Central Europe (and a few other exceptions, like France). After attending conferences and having talked to colleagues from different countries I realized that it was a question of timing. Self-regulation bodies in Western Europe have been typically established from the 60s on – but obviously not in the Soviet Bloc, where the V4 countries also belonged before 1989. Countries in Eastern Europe, that is countries of the former Soviet Bloc from Azerbaijan to Montenegro have introduced self-regulation because the EU and donor organizations advised to do so. But the four Visegrad countries finished their own transitions earlier and joined the EU already in 2004. When these countries joined the EU, self-regulation was not part of the requirements. And this can be serious, as the lack of accountability of the press undermines the trust of the public the media cannot live without.So, Right after the self-regulation platform has been launched in Hungary, we turned to our fellow Visegradians. It’s time to to patch up that hole in the self-regulation map! Creating an effective self-regulation takes a long way, but that long way starts now, with this very first step.THE CASE OF THE CZECH REPUBLICMedia legislationThe pieces of legislation either directly affect the operation of the media (media laws on the media) or indirectly affect the press (for example the Code of Criminal Procedure which does not primarily affect the media but still affects its operation as it stipulates that the press shall not disclose data related to proceedings in criminal matters)List of laws directly affecting the media:- Act No. 46/2000 on rights and duties related to publishing periodical press and on amendment to several other acts (Press Act)- Act No. 37/1995 on Non-Periodical Publications- Act No. 231/2001 on Radio and Television Broadcasting Operation and on Amendments to Other Acts- Act No. 40/1995 Coll., on the Regulation of Advertising and Amending Act No. 468/1991 Coll., on Radio and Television Broadcasting, as amended by later regulation- Act on Czech News Agency- Act on Czech Television- Act on Czech Radio- Act No. 121/2000 Coll., on Copyright and the Neighbouring Rights, Also Amending Other Acts (Copyright Act)- Act No. 101/2000 Coll., on Personal Data Protection- Act No. 148/1998 Coll. on Protection of Classified Information- Act No 106/1999 Coll., on Free Access to InformationCodes enacted after November 1989Before November 1989 journalists worked in a totalitarian regime.Thus, after the Velvet Revolution in the former Czech-Slovak Republic they categorically refused all restriction proposals and criticized the authors of thereof.Journalists regarded the recently acquired freedom of expression as the main principle of their work and used it as an argument to refuse any proposition on self-regulation.The first step leading to self-regulation was the Code of the Czech Television (Czech TV) adopted by the Council of the Czech Television as Annex to the Statutes of the Czech Television in September 1995.The Code of the Czech TV dealt with the rules of television programme production and made reference to the professional responsibilities of journalists, freedom of speech and non-biased presentation of news.The Code of Ethics for Journalists was adopted by the Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic on 18 June 1998.The document is binding on the members of the Association and the Association called on “every Czech and Moravian journalists irrespective of their membership in the association” to comply voluntarily with the Code.Nevertheless, the Czech daily and weekly newspapers started to elaborate their ethical codes only after 2000.The news magazine,?T?den had a pioneering role as it published its six-page code on 5 October 1998 with the following key principles: “timeliness, impartiality, neutrality, accuracy, diversity of opinions of minorities, protection of the right to privacy, openness, rejection of conflict of interest and plagiarism, etc.”4 years later Hospodá?ské noviny adopted its Ethical Code which primarily provided editorial teams with guidelines on professional-ethical procedures.The Code of Ethics of Mladá fronta Dnes was published the same year while regional daily newspapers belonging to Vltava-Labe-Press adopted their code two years later.At present a significant part of the Czech media, including Nova and Prima televisions or Blesk tabloid, have adopted code of ethics.These codes can be divided into three categories. The first category includes the codes of professional organisations, the second encompasses codes of the Czech TV and the Czech Radio and codes adopted by the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Parliament belong to the third category.The codes have different forms as there is no uniform template to be used for their elaboration.Various existing ethical codes and guidelines1. Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic – code of ethics 11/c of the final ministerial declaration of the 4th European Conference on Media Policy organised in Prague in December 1994 acknowledges that “journalists ”journalists have the right to adopt their own self-regulating norms, such as codes of ethics.”Resolution 2 of the conference states that such codes of behaviour shall be “voluntarily accepted and voluntarily applied” and that “the practice of the journalistic profession is primarily based on the fundamental right to freedom of speech guaranteed in Article 10 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms.The ethical codes of journalists adopted in many democratic European countries all strive, in various ways, to harmonise the rights and freedoms of journalists with the rights and freedoms of citizens in order to avoid conflicts. They also attempt to define the professional responsibilities of a journalist.Following the thorough examination of international and national documents, the Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic elaborated the ethical code of journalists which is binding for its members and which called on every Czech and Moravian journalists to adhere voluntarily to the Code irrespective of whether they are a members of the association.Basic principles of the Code of the Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic1. The right of citizens to timely, truthful, and undistorted informationThe citizens of a democratic state, regardless of their social status, have the inalienable right to information, as in Article 17 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which is part of the Constitution of the Czech Republic. Through their work, journalists turn this right into a reality. This is why they must accept full responsibility for providing the public with timely, full, truthful, and undistorted information. The citizen has a right to an objective portrayal of reality.2. The requirements of a high level of professionalism in journalismThe essence of a journalist’s profession is responsibility to the public. This is why a high degree of professionalism is a fundamental requirement of journalism.3. Credibility, decency, and reliability increase the media’s authorityIn this part, the guidelines journalists are to follow are defined.The Code of Ethics for Journalists was adopted by as an open document at the general meeting of the Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic on 18 June 1998 and, on the recommendation of the Ethics Committee of the Association, it was updated by the administrative council on 25 November 1999.Ethics CommitteeThe Ethics Committee of the Czech Association of Journalists has been functional since November 1998 and it meets eight times a year. The committee discusses statements of case related to the media or journalists and publishes position reports.Individuals and institutions can contact the Ethical Committee to the Association of Journalists of the Czech Republic directly or electronically: Television – Code approved by the Chamber of Deputies of Czech Parliament Czech Television Code was approved by the Chamber of Deputies of Czech Parliament on July 2, 2003.The fact that the document was adopted by the Chamber of Deputies of the Czech Parliament as well as the aforementioned reference to the Labour Code make the generally self-regulatory norms formulated and adopted by the media itself de facto provisions of labour law.Although by the word “code” the traditional interpretation usually means the ethical dimension of the word, which entails the use of comparatively broad terms and definitions of procedures, in the present case the law calls for the adoption of all norms that are enforceable and thus these norms shall be sufficiently unambiguous and concrete.The motive underlying the formulation of all the following principles and rules is the intention to promote the development of the public service provided by the Czech Television. The Code should not only provide guidelines for correct decision-making on concrete questions and problems related to TV broadcasting, but also embodies a commitment to quality, a binding obligation to the viewers and the general public.The Code is based on the concept of public service providing access to information, culture, education and entertainment to all citizens.In this respect the Czech Television functions as an open public forum for the confrontation of experiences, attitudes and feelings of various people and groups living in the Czech Republic.With this – among others - the Czech Television promotes the advancement of the informational and cultural identity of various minorities excluded from the sphere of mainstream opinions, culture and entertainment and raises the awareness of the majority population about these minorities.Structure of the Czech Television CodePreamble and Definition of TermsArticle 1 Viewers-citizens firstArticle 2 Special attention devoted to childrenArticle 3 Licence fee payers – an open relationshipArticle 4 Creativity as the basic prerequisite for successArticle 5 The culture of information in news and current affairs programmesArticle 6 Discussion programmes and pluralityArticle 7 Religious and ethical issuesArticle 8 Art programmes and individual preferencesArticle 9 LanguageArticle 10 Educational programmesArticle 11 Entertainment programmesArticle 12 Sports broadcastingArticle 13 Ban on discriminationArticle 14 Presumption of innocenceArticle 15 Respect for privacyArticle 16 Recording rulesArticle 17 Depiction of certain phenomenaArticle 18 Live broadcastingArticle 19 Critical situationsArticle 20 Charity workArticle 21 Commercial parts of the scheduleArticle 22 Conflict of interestsArticle 23 Czech Television as an institutionArticle 24 Care of the archivesArticle 25 Basic principles of financial managementArticle 26 Court actions and administrative proceedingsEthical Panel and Final Provisions Panel of the Czech TelevisionThe ethical panel is a consultative body to the Director-General of Czech Television.The task of the Panel is to formulate opinions on the ethically contested aspects of the programmes broadcasted by the Czech TV.The ethical panel is composed of five members. Membership in the ethical panel is an honorary and unpaid function. The panel is convened by the Secretary - as appropriate, but maximum 4 times a year - on the request of the Director-General of the Czech Television.The Panel adopts a resolution in each case. The resolution shall be adopted unanimously on the model of the medical ethics committees.The Director-General of Czech Television can disclose the text of the resolution of the panel to the public with the consent of the members of the Panel.The Ethical Panel was set up in the spring of 2004. Its first session was held on 28 May 2004.Council of the Czech TelevisionThe Council of the Czech Television is a body through which the public can exercise its controlling function over the Czech Television.The Council consists of 15 members appointed and recalled by the Chamber of Deputies of Czech Parliament. The members shall represent the major regional, political, social and cultural trends.Mafra and Economia – codes of conduct regulating the relationship of the owner and the editorial teamThe acquisition of MAFRA, one of the leading publishing houses – which owns the Czech broadsheet Mlada fronta Dnes (MfD) and the daily paper of Lidove noviny as well as other media including the Internet server, iDnes.cz.- in June 2013 by Andrej Babi?, the second richest Czech citizen and politician prompted fears of the owner’s political and economic interests affecting the independence of the editorial board.The concerns only intensified when Babi? called the political editor of Lidové noviny two days after the disclosure of the news on the acquisition demanding an explanation to why the daily paper had not mentioned the press conference on his political project.()On the phone Babi? first criticised the daily for not having dealt with his public appearance at all and then repeatedly asked who had instructed them to do so. At the request of the management of MAFRA, the prospective owner apologised for his behaviour in person at the office of the editorial board and proposed the elaboration of an ethical code.Babi? commissioned Karel Hví??ala, journalist and writer to elaborate the code who – among others – also participated in working out the Code of the Czech Radio.How did Hví??ala solve the problematic relationship between the editorial board and Babi?, the highly influential politician, entrepreneur and businessman (who subsequently became deputy prime minister and finance minister)?Extracts from the Code of Conduct of MAFRA media group owner shall protect the media with his behaviour and statements against the undesirable influence of political and economic actors and thereby ensures the editorial sovereignty of the media.The owner shall strive to further develop the position and prestige of the media owned by him. He shall only appear on the advertising space or in the so called editorial communications designated as such. The owner may appear as the author of texts reflecting opinion which will be published under the name of the author as in any other case.News of appropriate length shall report on the political and business activity of the owner in the society column. The impressum of each publication shall contain the following: “MAFRA Media Group belongs to AGROFERT Holding controlled by Ing. Andrej Babi?. This fact will also be indicated in articles if it is deemed appropriate and necessary to inform the readers.The code of conduct of Economia Publishing House acquired by billionaire Zdeněk Bakala in 2008 had dealt with the relationship of the owner and the editorial board before Andrej Babi? bought MAFRA.Extracts from the code of Economia ON THE PUBLISHING MARKET AND ON THE PUBLISHING HOUSE- Publishers deem the publishing and advertising market to be an integral part of the market economy and thus they are obliged to provide quality and professional information on them.– Editors shall deal with topics where Economia Publishing House or certain parts of it appear with the highest standards of competence. It derives from their obligation to provide full and undistorted information to the readers.– Editors shall provide information on Economia Publishing House, its parts and publications in such coverage and manner that they would apply in case of not belonging to this publishing house.– Editors shall provide information on the activity of the majority shareholder without restrictions and in an objective manner. They shall provide information in such coverage and manner that they would apply in any other case. They shall state this fact in the text or in a comment.Ethical crisis situationsAbove we have only dealt with the legal and (self)regulatory frameworks of Czech media.In the following we would like to present the unethical and even unlawful practices of the Czech media, their owners or journalists.CASE STUDY 1How to rule the editorial board?After the acquisition of MAFRA Publishing House, new owner Andrej Babi? wanted to include the operator of Rádio Impuls, a Czech radio station with the largest audience in his mass media portfolio. Hlídací [“Watchdog”], news server has repeatedly quantified the “media artillery”. market share of Andrej Babi?’s media (sold or distributed copies and readership)Political dailies, newspapers (Mladá fronta Dnes, Lidové noviny, Metro): 44,2% of the market (510 835 copies) – 1,366 million readersWeekly news magazines (5plus2, Téma)85, 8% of the market (838 000 pieces) – 1, 8 million readers (Note: In the case of 5plus2 there are no viewing figures available on, the latest data are from last survey of STEM in October 2013. No viewing data have been published yet on the new weekly paper Téma. At the end of November, MAFRA communicated that the number of sold copies was 18.000).Web: (idnes.cz, lidovky.cz, etc.)5,266 million actual users, which means tat 64,2% of all Czech Internet users visited one of the ?Babi?-portal” at least once a month.(In October 2014 the total number of actual users was a 8 200 454)Rádió (Rádio Impuls)12,3% of the market (the radio station with full coverage makes up 25.7% of the market), The audience of Impuls is 2,1 million persons per week and more than 1 million people select the frequency of the station every day.Television (TV ??ko)2,2 million viewers monthly (In the 15+ category the share of ??ko is 0,48% while ??ko GOLD? has a share of 0,28%.)Source: ABC ?R – October 2014; Mediaprojekt – 2nd and 3rd quarter of 2014; Radioprojekt - 2nd and 3rd quarter of 2014.Andrej Babi? wanted to to get their people into the key positions of the media. Within one year after the acquisition of control over MAFRA, the editors-in-chief of the two key publications were replaced. The head of Lidové noviny is István Léko as of 1 December 2013. Mladá fronta Dnes was taken over by Sabina Slonková on 1 January 2014 but – unlike Lékó – she gave up after less than six months. She was succeeded by Jarolsav Plesl. Meanwhile Andrej Babi? kept promising that he would not interfere with the content of the papers.According to Hlídací (“Watchdog”) news server, by May 2014 almost the entire editorial management and editors holding key positions of Mladá fronta Dnes és a Lidové noviny departed from their jobs.List of Babi? the end of June 2013 Andrej Babi? announced the acquisition of Mafra Publishing House. Since then he has several times assured everyone that he would not interfere with the life of the editorial boards. These were the words of the present editor–in-chief of Lidové noviny that later became a catchphrase: “Can we believe him or should we not?”It is clear that comparing the situation in 1 May 2014 and in July the previous year, nothing remained untouched in the editorial boards of Mladá fronta Dnes és a Lidové noviny. There have also been significant changes within the editorial teams. Hlídací news portal has compiled a list of those who resigned or who were “convinced” to resign. The list below is probably not exhaustive; I would welcome supplements. Everyone shall draw their own conclusions.Mladá fronta DnesHeads of the editorial team:Robert ?ásensk? – editor-in-chief, resignedMartina Riebauerová – deputy editor-in-chief, position discontinuedKarel ?krabal – former deputy editor-in-chief, then head of regional editorial room, resignedMichal Musil – former deputy editor-in-chief, head of the newsroom and theKavárna supplement, resignedAdéla Dra?anová – head of the integrated foreign affairs column of MF DNES, iDNES.cz and a Lidové novinyMartin Moravec – head of the DNES + TV magazine, position discontinuedEditorial team:Jana Klímová – investigative journalist, resignedRobert Klos – editor, resignedJaroslav Kmenta – investigative journalist, resignedJaroslav Ma?ek – economic journalist, resignedPavel Novotn? – editor of the integrated foreign affairs column, resignedVladimír ?evela –journalist of the internal policies column, transferred to Prague column with lower salary, refused transfer and then resignedAntonín Viktora –journalist of the internal policies column, resignedLidové novinyHeads of the editorial teamDalibor Bal?ínek – editor-in-chief, termination of employment by mutual agreementJan Dra?an – deputy editor-in-chief, resignedDalibor Martínek – deputy editor-in-chief, resignedTomá? Něme?ek – ad of Právo a Justice supplement, resignedOnd?ej Suchan – head of Pátek Lidov?ch novin supplement, resignedVladimír K?ivka – head of the of the internal policies column, resignedKamila Klausová – managing editor, resignedJan Zátorsky – head of the magazine-photo department of the joint editorial team, termination of employment by mutual agreementEditorial teamVáclav Drchal – Právo a Justice, resignedMiloslav Janík – lidovky.cz, resignedDaniel Kaiser – commentator, resignedJan Kálal – reporter of the domestic affairs editorial team, resignedFilip Nachtman – reporter of the domestic affairs column, filed resignation letterOnd?ej ?tindl – editor of culture column, resignedMartin Weiss – commentator, resignedLenka Zlámalová – commentator, resignedThe above mentioned Sabina Slonková endured six months in the position of editor-in-chief of Mladá fronta Dnes. Today she is head of the Neovlivni.cz [Do not influence] internet project which, among others, attempts to map the political and business activities of Andrej Babi?. After some time she described the attitude of Andrej Babi? towards the media in his ownership as follows:“The independence of a newspaper is only an empty phrase for Babi? and his associates.” Slonková remained silent about the reasons why she had left the editor in chief’s chair of Mladá fronta Dnes, which she gained after Andrej Babi?’s acquisition of the Mafra Publishing House. Today she claims that editorial independence works on the principle of “So far and no further” in Babi?’s publishing house. .The former editor-in-chief of Mladá fronta Dnes left Mafra Publishing House on 1 July 2014 after holding the post for six months. Both she and the management of Mafra refused to comment on the quick end. The only official statement was the following sentence of the press release: “We would like to thank Sabina for her responsible work and we wish her a successful personal and professional career in the future. Our door will always remain open for her.” (Just for the record: The press release was sent to the media by Karel Hanzelka, spokesperson of Agrofert group.)A dry, correct sentenceSlonková commented her leave with two formal sentences in the press release: “I would like to wish the best for Mladá fronta DNES in the years to come.” And then meaningfully but vaguely she wrote the following about Mediaguru server: “My views about content diametrically differ from the rest of the management.”Sabina Slonková’s recent interview to Karel Hví??ala was published on Aktualne.cz server.It is notable that Karel Hví??ala was the author of the ethical code of Babi?’ Mafra. The politician and businessman used the code as a pretext when ensuring everyone that he would not interfere with the content of his media. The other guarantee would have been Sabina Slonková.Below we republish the part of the conversation where Slonková speaks about the situation within Mafra Publishing House. According to Miloslava Nováková, director of public affairs, the publishing house would not comment on the serious allegations of the former editor-in-chief of MfD.Sabina Slonková: I did not want to become the gravedigger of MF Dnes.Andrej Babi? designated you as editor-in-chief in 2013 when he acquired Mafra after Robert ?ásensk?, the editor-in-chief of Mladá fronta Dnes resigned. However, you only stayed six months in your position. Why did you leave on 1 July 2014?It turned out that I had a completely different view about the meaning of the concept of independence in practice.You needed six months to realise it?No, but it turned out only six months later that it was impossible to perform meaningful work in my position at MF Dnes. Our disagreement was so serious that it practically made the publication of an independent paper impossible. I realised that if I were to stay in my position, I would do things that I never wanted to do. I did not want to dig the grave of the paper where I started my career and which was important for me.Why weren’t these things clarified in your contract with Mafra? Why didn’t the contract contain the clause that the editor-in-chief bears exclusive responsibility for the content of the paper as it is normally the case abroad?These are things that cannot be covered contractually given the Czech situation. The very moment you realise that the people you are supposed to create something together with have a completely different mentality and that independence in practice means ”so far and no further” for them, contracts and codes become worth of nothing.Could you specify it more concretely?I am on the firm belief that the content of a newspaper that wants to maintain its independence cannot be formulated according to the wishes of the advertisers, business partners, political friends and friends of the political friends. This is nothing else but the deception of the readers and I think it is also the road to hell. It is especially so when we speak about a paper the owner of which is a member of the government and one of the top five business moguls. In this case, special effort should be taken to convince the reader that they can trust us because the information we provide is not distorted. If we lose our credit we won’t be able to regain it. And I was left alone with this belief of mine in the management.However, the editors themselves tried to work properly and while I was there I never experienced self-censorship that OK, we will leave this for others because we don’t want to get into trouble.If you recognise that the people you are supposed to create something together with think completely differently than you, you also realise that contracts and codes are worth nothing.Could you mention a concrete situation?When we discussed concrete cases, it turned out that independence is just an empty phrase for the managers of Mafta. And I could not convince them that credit is the greatest asset for the media. As if we had been in two different worlds. I might be of the same opinion about millions of things with the management of Andrej Babi? but it doesn’t mean that at the end our paths could not diverge: my responsibility is that the news in the paper shall not be manipulated.Within one year Andrej Babi? filled the managerial posts with his own people and practically all editors setting a high value on independence left the publishing house. Hlídací disclosed a few cases when Andrej Babi? was supported by his own media in achieving his goals.First, Hlídací analysed the key role of Mladá fronta Dnes and Lidové Noviny in the attack against the Minister of Justice whom her boss in the party, Andrej Babi? wanted to get rid of. After the vast media attack the Minister was removed… second example is when Hlídací examined the role of Lidové noviny in questioning the reappointment of the head of the Competition Office. Andrej Babi? used his influence to have a new man appointed but ?SSD (Czech Social Democratic Party) headed by the prime minister insisted on the reappointment of the current president. The political and media mudwrestling ended with the tight defeat of Andrej Babi?, the cabinet voting was delayed. third example is the attack of the Andrej Babi? media on one of the reporters of the Czech Television who had to be defended by the chief executive of the public television in public. STUDY 2:An image of migrantsIn May 2016 the Czech NGO Hlídací (“Watchdog”) revealed that it had testimonies from several sources stating that the television station’s management gave producers there clear instructions during a meeting on 7 September 2015 about what angle to take toward the refugee “crisis” in its news reporting. The television did not comment on the news.The station’s reporting on the issue took center stage this spring because of how it reported on the arrival of Christian refugees from Iraq to the Czech Republic.The instructions of the management were to depict refugees as a risk and a threat. one particular reportage [] was broadcast there was much discussion over whether one of those refugees had actually compared the accommodation he was offered to a “repainted cowshed”. There was debate and reporting on whether the interpretation of his words from Arabic had been correct or distorted in some way. After several months of investigative work, has acquired information and proof confirming that the management of Prima, together with the chief producers in the newsroom, have long advocated for the refugee issue to be presented primarily as a crisis, problem and threat. That is the spirit in which reporters are instructed to produce their news reporting.Both an analysis of the Prima’s news broadcasts undertaken by Hlídací and an analysis of its news reporting commissioned by the Council on Radio and Television Broadcasts confirm those suspicions.Prima is an influential media outlet because it is the third most-watched television station in the Czech Republic - 23 % of the 15 and older age group watch it at some point during the day.It is also notable that the station is half-owned by the Swedish company MTG, which is listed on the Swedish stock exchange in Stockholm.The instructions to reporters are said to have been designed directly by a representative of one of the owners, vice-chair of the board of FTV Prima Holding Lubo? Jetmar, as well as by the Editor-in-Chief of the newsroom, Jitka Obzinová.As the management of TV Prima obviously decided to ignore the scandal, Hlídací decided to publish an audio recording evidencing that the employees of the newsroom of the Prima television station had been instructed by the management to manipulate the news on the migration crisis.Among others, the following sentence is audible: “The management of TV Prima has its opinion and you are to respect this opinion.”ídací published essential information about the fact that the management of TV Prima instructed its news reporters to always present the topic of refugees as a crisis, problem and threat. The station called the information mere speculation. Hlídací published key evidence of its claims, namely, an audio recording from the meeting where the decision was announced.In the recording from 7 September 2015, Jitka Obzinová, Editor-in-Chief of the FTV Prima newsroom, tells her staff that “We are all employees here, we have an employer who has taken a certain position on this. If I, as head of broadcasting, accept that, then you will simply obey the orders of the head of broadcasting. If not, then basically you are not accepting what it means to be employed here, and that means there is no point in employing you further.”News according to the opinions of the managementHlídací is convinced it is in the public interest to publish the recording. Prima is a media outlet with a great deal of influence when it comes to shaping Czech public opinion. The recording confirms that the coverage of the topic of the refugee crisis is not being conducted according to journalistic standards enshrined, for example, in the code of ethics [] that Prima has signed. Instead, reporting on this topic must be produced in accordance with the opinions of the station management. In the recording, Lubo? Jetmar, Vice-Chair of the board of FTV Prima Holding, representing one of the station’s owners, even emphasizes the media outlet’s influence over public opinion and its significance to the newsroom staff as follows: “You are working in the newsroom of a television channel that is a rather influential, strong media outlet and we influence majority opinion in this country.”Prima is the third most-watched channel in the Czech Republic, with 23 % of viewers aged 15 and older watching it at some point in the day, every day.The recording from the extraordinary meeting that was convened to discuss how to report on the refugee crisis was secretly made by somebody who was in the room. Before its release earlier this week it had never been published before. Hlídací acquired the recording on the condition of perserving their source’s anonymity.The authenticity of the recording is beyond reproach - several other persons who participated in that meeting have confirmed its authenticity to Hlídací independent of one another.After the publication of the tape, all major media in the Czech Republic reported on the case. TV Prima refused to admit their mistake. To defend itself, Prima TV shot some “newscast” with friendy “experts” justifying the actions of the station.Politicians also refrained from criticising Prima TV too harshly as the views reflected in the manipulative coverage of Prima were in concord with the negative opinion of the majority of the Czech population about migrants.Moreover, Czech president Milo? Zeman praised Prima for their manipulated reporting on the refugee crisis.The Council for Radio and Television Broadcasting (RRTV) that had awarded the licence of Prima TV is now monitoring the news and feature programs of the station; the conclusions of the analysis are expected to be published in fall 2016. STUDY 3Conviction for defamation is not a problemA policeman who was caught, proven guilty and legally convicted of theft cannot work as a policeman. A journalist who was legally convicted of defamation in print continues to contribute to newspapers as well as online news site, enjoying the support of the publisher’s management. We are talking about Martin Voká?, a reporter for a daily Mladá fronta DNES, owned by the Mafra Company that belongs to minister of finances Andrej Babi?. The case of the policeman was given as an example on purpose, as the victim of the reporter’s libel was head of Jihlava’s police Petr Petr.The Supreme Court turned down the appeal of the MF DNES reporter. The verdict is still in force. case of an alleged police fight in a summer house near the hill ?e?ínek has been finally clarified. MF DNES reporter Martin Voká? was sentenced to nine months of probation for libel committed in print. The Supreme Court turned down his appeal. Thus the sentence given by lower courts remains in force.If the convicted journalist had acknowledged his failure at the trial and apologized, the whole case could have been stopped and the journalist would have had clean record now.The MAFRA publishing house has been lately sued for non-property damages. Colonel Petr Petr demands over 250 thousand CZK for having his reputation defamed. “My client is waiting for offers of an amicable settlement,” stated Radek Ondru?, the lawyer of Petr Petr.The Name of Colonel Petr Petr ClearedIn the autumn 2012, Czech media informed about an incident in a police cottage in ?e?ínek. According to the media, police were supposed to attack a young man and wound him. In October 2012, MFDNES reporter Martin Voká? published untrue information about Colonel Petr Petr by stating he was among the aggressors. Petr Petr demanded removing his name from the report, as he was not among the attackers. It took some time MFDNES to remove his name.The police investigation did not confirm that Petr Petr took part in the fight at the cottage. The police filed the case against reporter Martin Voká?. He received nine months of probation by the lower court. The probation was confirmed by the Regional Court of Appeal. However, the Supreme Court refused to hear Voká?’s matter.MAFRA to File the Case at the Constitutional Court“We will use all means possible to support our employee,” said Franti?ek Nachtigall, MAFRA head for strategic management.Nachtigall’s words indicate MAFRA company is planning to file the case of reporter Martin Voká? at the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic.Ob?asník.eu is a project of a regional journalist from the Vyso?ina region. It attempts at mapping “cases, events and news from the Vyso?ina region”. Despite the fact Czech major publishing houses accepted Voká?’s report about the alleged police incident in ?e?ínek originally published at the Ob?asník.eu, when it transpired Voká? fabricated the story, no one informed about his probation sentence at all. Only Hlídací did. Thanks to Hlídací the case became known more publicly. Thus the Czech Syndicate of Journalists? management learned about the case as well. And yet, nothing has happened.The situation remained unchanged even after Ob?asník.eu published information on July 13, 2016 about the Constitutional Court turning down the complaint of reporter Martin Voká?.The court decision is in force. The Constitutional Court turned down the appeal of MFDNES reporter. lower court made a correct decision when it found the MFDNES reporter Martin Voká? guilty in committing libel by print. According to the Ob?asník.eu the Constitutional Court turned down the appeal of Martin Voká?.Several years ago reporter Martin Voká? reported wrongly that Police Colonel Petr Petr took part in a fight near the ?e?ínek settlement. The presence of Petr Petr during the attack on a young man was not proven. Another policeman was not proven guilty in a court, even though he was accused of taking part in the fight by the General Inspection of Security Units. In a civil litigation case the state had to pay several thousands CZK in damage to the policeman.A court will soon deal with the non-property damage amounting to 250 thousand CZK claimed by Colonel Petr Petr.The Reporter Continues His WorkDespite being convicted reporter Voká? continues to work as a journalist.“A man who was legally convicted of libel can continue his work as a journalist, because there are no legal conditions set by law for pursuing a job of a journalist. However, the Code of Ethics of the Czech Syndicate of Journalists, which is an association based on a voluntary membership, stipulates a condition that a man legally convicted of committing crime cannot be a member of the Syndicate,” says head of the Syndicate, Adam ?ern?.CASE STUDY 4If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truthIn February 2016, the daily Právo published an article titled “Huge Migration Wave: All Reasonable Rules Set Aside”. The news online Novinky.cz published the article as well. The piece is based on a testimony of Martin Herzán, former member of the Czech Council for Human Rights. He is said to have spent six weeks in December 2015-January 2016 in a refugee camp Dobova at the Croatian-Slovenian borders.During those six weeks Herzán was supposed to witness arresting several radical Islamist fighters among migrants, some of them having mobile phones with videos of torturing people or killing children. “Some even had child pornography or pictures and videos of torturing naked women,” says Herzán in the report.The article also says that “several kilograms of weapons – mainly stabbing and cutting weapons, tasers, nunchakus and other types” were seized by the police on daily basis. Apart from arresting several dozens radical Islamists every day, Herzán also claims the Slovenian criminal police investigated them, recorded their names and let them continue in their journey through Europe. daily Referendum proved the alleged human rights activist Martin Herzán made it all up. Later on, the daily Referendum discovered Herzán is an employee of the Czech Police Force. Not the daily Právo nor the Novinky.cz web site made an effort in trying to detect the Herzán’s real identity. revealing the real identity of Herzán several days after, Czech public service radio commentator Petr ?antovsk? quoted a large part of Herzán’s report in one of the radio programmes. ?antovsk?’s comment is still on the web sites of Novinky.cz as well as the Czech public service radio. ?míd, media analyst, commentator and university teacher of the Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University responded to ?antovsk?’s comment adequately at the web site Manipulatori.cz. A quote is below.Opinions and Arguments of Petr ?antovsk?It would be good if any opinion of any political dimension was based on facts and did not alter reality.The analysis and news radio station ?Ro Plus promotes policy in its programme titled “Opinions and Arguments” that is based on the diversity of political views (Jind?ich ?ídlo, Ji?í Leschtina, Petr Hartmann, Jan J?n, Ond?ej Soukup, Karel Hví??ala, Jan Mlejnek, Adam ?ern?, Alexandr Mitrofanov, Zdeněk Velí?ek, Richard Seeman, Ji?í Pehe, Petr ?antovsk? etc). So within this 30-minute programme we could listen to views of Jan Fingerland (on primaries in the U.S.), Jan Machá?ek (on EU and deal with Britain), Ji?í Pehe (on Europe and its processes of changes), Robert Schuster (on Austria’s refugee policy) and Petr ?antovsk? (on migrants).It is praiseworthy that apart from major Czech commentators from various media outlets Czech public service radio broadcasts also voices coming from the media non-mainstream. I mean Petr ?antovsk? whose opinions more or less mirror views of people surrounding Václav Klaus. I have no problem with that. However, it would be good if any opinion of any political dimension was based on facts and did not alter reality. In my view Petr ?antovsk?’s piece called Testimony, which should not be forgotten fails in all aspects. ?antovsk? mentions the article of Martin Herzán Testimony from Refugee Camp: Migrants Are Like Time Bomb, The European Union Lost Its Mind. Again, it is a completely fine to mention the article.But, Petr ?antovsk? ignores the debate that Herzán’s “testimony” provoked – at the daily Referendum web site and on Facebook. Not that I would want to praise Vojtěch Bohá? (=Referendum commentator), ?antovsk? should have considered the real identity of Martin Herzán and take seriously the whole debate about it. Herzán says at his web site he is a “writer, poet, historian, painter,” but the main thing is missing – this civil right activist is also the member of the Czech police force. The Wikipedia profile of Martin Herzán demonstrates his chaotic activism, which oscillates between the Green Party and Communist Party and which makes him always take action the goal of which is to get attention.It was also the case of his report published in the daily Právo, which is based on his personal presence in a police mission in Slovenia. He fabricated his stories (“I saw how they detected radical Islamist fighters among migrants. There were several kilos of weapons seized every day – mainly stabbing and cutting weapons”). The Slovenian police commented on Herzán’s report this way:“Each migrant undergoes a detailed security check upon entering Slovenia. Up to this date, no migrant has been found carrying weapons or explosive devices or similar hazardous objects altered for the purpose of attack. Police officers occasionally seize small items such as lighters, scissors, razor blades, knives, bottle openers etc. As a rule, knives tend to be small-size knives, intended to be used in food preparation.”Again, it is good to learn about what is happening in Greece and in the Balkans, from where thousands of migrants are coming to Europe. Nonetheless, the “testimony that should not be forgotten” should be based on facts, without exaggeration, since it can be scaremongering. I would expect Petr ?antovsk? to carefully analyse Herzán’s testimony, as any proper journalist should do, so the reader can get an objective picture.Unfortunately, I haven’t found this in his comment. Just the opposite, ?antovsk? (by the way, he renamed Martin Herzán to Michal Herzán) introduces Herzán as a “humanitarian worker” whose “authority in the area of humanitarian non-profit organizations goes without saying.” If Petr ?antovsk? made an effort and verified the identity of Herzán?s “authority of an experienced professional, working for non-profit human rights organizations”, he would find out the only non-profit organization that Herzán ever worked for is the one he founded himself – it is called the European Union for Human Rights. Instead, ?antovsk? merely repeats whatever Herzán says in his report. Herzán claims all is true but there are no proofs such as pictures of the weapons seized by the police in the Právo article.I am absolutely for Petr ?antovsk? broadcasting his comments in ?Ro Plus programme “Opinions and Arguments”. But I would appreciate if his opinions – whoever is the author of them – are based on facts, not impressions, as ?antovsk? sometimes tends to do.In Louc.cz I have commented on his journalism several times. I cannot help myself not to quote one of ?antovsk?’s comments dating back to 2002:“…our commentators. Except for few exceptions, they often see their role in presenting arguments to support their own, ready-made opinion, which is presented to the reader as the only view, or attitude, or statement possible, generally accepted and almost binding. Such commentators do not need facts. The only thing they want is attention.”That sounds like self-criticism to me.()THE CASE OF SLOVAKIACASE STUDY 1: Lawyer?s office versus Newspaper Plus Jeden deňThe introductionThere was an appeal delivered to the Press Council of the Slovak Republic on May 19th 2014 from Mgr. Slavka Michnova per procuration of Lawyer?s office VASI?, ?IMONOVI? & partners Ltd. against the newspaper Plus Jeden deň, delivered by Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd. The appelee objected, that with the publishing of the article of author Stanislava Vdovcova ?Sanctions first, later the massage of breasts. Did the teacher attach her third class scholars to the chairs?“ in?newspaper Plus Jeden deň from March?22 of 2014, the objector breached the Code of Ethics.The appelee reminds, that with regard to a?false claims in the article, he has requested a?correction in accordance to the § 7 of act legislative Nr. 167/2008 of Collection of Law, what was not accepted by the objector?s side. In addition, the activity of Mgr. Michnova described in the article, was also an object of criminal prosecution by police and Public Prosecutor?s office, what was stopped later because no allegations were proved by the content of article. The affair was also a?part of the District court hearing in Spi?ská Nová Ves. It was proved by the hearing that Mgr. Michnova didn?t practise immorally, what?s in conflict with the article. The person spreading these false claims was obligated by the court to apologize and compensate the non-asset damage in the amount of 2.000,- euros.The procedure (Children)The Press Council of the Slovak Republic was acquainted with the article ?Sanctions first, later the massage of breasts. Did the teacher attach her third class scholars to the chairs?“ The author writes, that the school-mistress Slavka M. of the Elementary school in Slovinky, Spi?ská Nová Ves district, ?had to be thumbed and embrocated by the children during the teaching process“ ... the children have had ?to be attached to the chairs to enforce a?discipline and order. After that she got caress and massage.“ According to the reportedly affirmations of several parents she should have been touched her?breasts by children. The schoolchildren, during that time scholars of third class, were instructed to keep it in secret.The author of the article is namely citing only the directress of the school Katarina Stehlikova: ?Without the evidence of children I?couldn?t believe, that anything like that is possible.“ One of the mothers gave a report to the police for criminal prosecution of the school-mistress, that – as we know from the investigation of the cause, but not from the article – was stopped, because no allegations from the article were proved.The author refers at the end of the article to the anonymous parents of the children, they were not teached by Slavka: ?She should not work with children any more. The facts we have got to know went around us.“The school-mistress reported in the article is named without her surname like ?Slavka M.“ and the article is illustrated with a?big photography of the school-mistress with overlapped eyes, but her identification right in the village and markedly in the district is absolutely simple.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked the objector to get its opinion to the appeal. The newspaper Plus Jeden deň delivered by Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd. didn?t answered to the appeal.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic claimed, that the allegations reported in the article ?Sanctions first, later the massage of breasts. Did the teacher attach her third class scholars to the chairs?“ that the school-mistress Slavka M. should attach the schoolchildren to the chairs, should have been thumbed and embrocated by children, even to force them to touch her breasts and besides that to force them to keep it in secret are not true. There is otherwise mentioned in the article, that the criminal prosecution on this subject was stopped, because ?there were no facts like that established, that should prove that real?crime has happened.“ But there is not mentioned that the District court in Spi?ská Nová Ves in procedure imposed to the person spreading reflected false claims, a?charge to apologize for the information and compensate the non-asset damage in the value of 2.000,- Euros. It is clear from this aspect, that also the headline of the article is misleading and false. Besides that the District court in Spi?ská Nová Ves claimed in?reflected procedure, that the petition of some parents of the schoolchildren against the school-mistress Mgr. Slavka Michnova was simulated, the signs at the petition are not real.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic judged, that the editors of the newspaper Plus Jeden deň should have taken these facts into the account including determinations of District court in Spi?ská Nová Ves and should satisfy the appelee with her appeal for adjustment posted by her delegate, the Lawyer?s office VASI?, ?IMONOVI? & partners Ltd., by the § 7 of act legislative Nr. 167/2008 of Collection of Law.There is also a plumbless aberrance against the Code of Ethics of the Journalist the fact, that the author of the article didn?t address the school-mistress Mgr. Slavka Michnova coupled with the allegations.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic decided, that by the publishing of the article the editors of newspaper Plus Jeden deň breached the Code of Ethics of the Journalist, specifically:paragraph IIThe basic attributes2. The basic attributes for the work of journalist are the neutrality, flexibility, objectivity, honesty, reality, responsibility and consistently reference.paragraph IIIThe journalist and the public1. The journalist will do everything what is necessary to give the public true and verified information. The information must be verified at least from two independent sources.2. The journalist is forced to representing source of his information, if they are not generally known in the professional section. The source is not representing in the case of using undisclosed or secret information. Such a?source can be used in compliance with the provisions of the code about the special sources utilization, designed under.6. The titles of articles or programs can not be misleading or false. The same holds for all types of advertising coupled with articles and programs promotion.16. If the journalist published untrue information, he must rectify it including the publication without the aggrieved persons or editorial office warning.The decisionThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that with the publishing of the article ?Sanctions first, later the massage of breasts. Did the teacher attach her third class scholars to the chairs?“ in newspaper Plus Jeden deň from March?22 of 2014 at the 8th page was breached the Code of Ethics of the Journalist. Specifically the paragraph II. of the code -the basic attributes - was breached, clause 2 and?paragraph III. The journalist and the public, clauses 1, 2, 6 and?16.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic pronounced in connection with involved activity to the newspaper Plus Jeden deň a reprehension.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked together the publisher Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd. to public the decision in the nearest possible edition of the newspaper Plus Jeden deň.CASE STUDY 2: Local Administration versus Periodical magazine Bratislavské novinyIntroductionThere was an appeal delivered to the Press Council of the Slovak Republic from Alexandra Obuchova, from Local office of Old city against the Periodical magazine Bratislavské noviny, published by NIVEL PLUS, Ltd. In the appeal was introduced, that by the publishing of the articles: Old city by the choosing of wrecker service Car Towing breached a law; After the two hundred thousand machine they have to clean, and City Gastro has failed in school dining-rooms, but despite of that they are cooking for seniors, the Code of Ethics was breached. The author of controversial articles was Radoslav Stevcik.The appelee introduced, that Radoslav Stevcik is a?chief editor of the Periodical magazine and besides that is?candidating for a?post of the mayor of Town section Bratislava – Old city. The appelee is blaming Radoslav Stevcik for his comments and confessions, they are not clearly specified and diversified from news service and facts and also, that his confessions are in defiance to the facts. The appelee next blames the editor, that he failed by the providing the adequate space for the Town section Bratislava – Old city for the expression to the describing topics. By the appelee?s opinion even the headlines of the articles are misleading and false.The procedureThe chief editor of the Periodical magazine Radoslav Stevcik was asked for the expression to the introduced appeal. He has emphasized in his expression, that by the paragraph 26 of Constitution of Slovak Republic, clause 1, the journalist should have?guaranteed the freedom of speach and the right of information. By the paragraph 2, everybody has a?right to represent his confessions in a?word, script, print, picture or other way, as willingly investigate, receive and extend ideas and information aside from the country borders. Along with this he has asked the Press Council of the Slovak Republic for a?verbally procedure.Within the hearing Radoslav Stevcik confirmed, that he was the author of adversary articles. By the stated date he was also the?mayor of Town section Bratislava – Old city, and is?still the only one companion of the company NIVEL PLUS, Ltd., the publisher of Periodical magazine Bratislavské noviny. Radoslav Stevcik could not confirm, either the appeal was interpreted in the name of Town section by A. Obuchova fulfilling her working duties or it was a?private appeal of Alexandra Obuchova. In case of the Town section Bratislava – Old city?s appeal, where he is presently the?statutory body, he is not taking back this appeal. Radoslav Stevcik introduced, that by writing the adversary articles he was emanated from the decision of the Office of Public procurement and before published the information and expressions of the aggrieved Town section. Because of that reason he didn?t consider it necessary to give a?space for expression from Town section Bratislava – Old city side. He has confirmed after the question of the Press Council of the Slovak Republic members that he decided to candidate for a?mayor of the Town section Bratislava – Old city by beginning of the August 2014 when he started to collect signs for the support of his candidature.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic - from his own initiative – has ensured the additional media outputs that on the date of publishing noted articles, announced the?nomination of Radoslav Stevcik for the post of the mayor of Town section Bratislava – Old city.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic, according to noted materials, considers for proved that Radoslav Stevcik in the time of publishing objecting articles did know that he is going to candidate for the?mayor of Town section Bratislava – Old city. During the time of publishing objecting articles in the Periodical magazine, controlled by him like the?chief editor and like the only one?companion controlling his publisher, Radoslav Stevcik did know that he is going to collect signs for the support of his person like an?independent candidate for an above remarked function. Publicly (in media) was this actuality presented on August 8, 2014, one day after the publishing of the articles in the Periodical magazine Bratislavské noviny and at that very moment when Periodical magazine with a?view to using distribution channels, the citizens of Bratislava have found them in their own post-boxes. The Press Council of the Slovak Republic had not proven, if in the adversary articles there were published true or false information. But the Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that the journalist has the?right to rely on official sources (for example the decision of the Office of Public procurement) and these information he doesn?t need to verify any more.According to these facts, the Press Council of the Slovak Republic has concentrated on the examination of the conformity in appeal objecting actualities with following clauses of the Code of Ethics of the Journalist:Paragraph IIThe basic attributes2. The basic attributes for the work of journalist are the neutrality, flexibility, objectivity, honesty, reality, responsibility and consistently reference.Paragraph IIIThe journalist and the public15. The journalist is not politically engaged by the situations of conflict of interests or neutrality and objectivity threating.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic considers that it is not possible to consider the affected articles, with a?view to the content and a?position of Radoslav Stevcik, to be objective, impartial and balanced.There is an absence of any neutrality or distance to the concept and critique format of the administration of the Town section Bratislava – Old city, chosen by the author of the articles (chief editor of the Periodical magazine and owner of publisher) in time, when he was alone decided to compete against the criticised person in elections for the favour of voters. There is no transparency in the author?s attitude to the reader, which is not informed that the text may be (is) a?part of election campaign one of the possible candidates. There are much missing the attributes of accuracy, materiality, recency and readibility for the reader of the objecting texts. An average reader (with regards to a?defection of presented facts and eventually their specific interpretation) is not able to make himself a?particular opinion over the problematics from the texts.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic, according to introduced facts, had admittedly proved, that in time of publishing objecting texts their author was politically engaged. His candidature for the public function or more precisely its preparation in time of the publishing of the articles about his greatest political opponent, features a?conflict of interest and discredites impartiality and objectivity of Radoslav Stevcik as a?journalist. The Press Council of the Slovak Republic considers such a?practice of journalist for impermissible in democratic system. The readers by the procedure of concrete journalist are not recipients of an independent and objective journalism, but they are an object of manipulation from journalist for the purpose of achievement of his personal goal. This corresponds even without the reference to the single content of published text. In such a?case there is not sufficient enough if the journalist himself feels subjectively impartial and objective. In accordance with the ethical standards of newspapering it is necessary to perceive a?journalist to be?objective and impartial also from the view of an average reader having to his disposal all relevant facts (political involvement of the journalist).The decisionThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that with the publication of the articles: ?Old city by the choosing of wrecker service Car Towing breached a law; After the two hundred thousand machine they have to clean and City Gastro failed in school dining-rooms, but is cooking for seniors paragraph II. clause 2 and?paragraph III. clause 15 of the Code of Ethics of the Journalist were breached.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic pronounced, in connection with involved activity of Periodical magazine Bratislavské noviny, a disconcertion.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked the publisher NIVEL PLUS, Ltd. to public the information about the decision in the nearest edition of the Periodical magazine of Bratislavské noviny.CASE STUDY 3: Minority Group versus Newspaper Plus Jeden deňIntroductionThe appelee objected, that with the publication of the article ?The racist“ Kormuthova, Gypsies chased her off from Slovakia! in newspaper Plus Jeden deň from September?11th in 2014, objector has breached the journalistic ethics. The appelee introduced, that the ?headline of the article is expressly a fraud, which is having a?strong tendency to activate a?malignance against the Gypsies. So, the publisher Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd., is unethically lying and helping to the racism. In case of the headline at the front-page, it is especially dangerous for the community, because is intervening also the non-readers public by the advertisement and presentation“.The procedureThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic was acquainted with the article, in which it was written about the problems of the femcee of the television sports-news of RTVS Kristina Kormuthova with her termination of the employment from the side of the employer, because of her verbal attack of Gypsies at the social net. According to the article ?the carousel of ?problems for the brunette“ started immediately. We have got to know from the article, that ?Kristina has decided to start her job in a?place, where nobody knows her.“ It should be the United States. The author of the article cites her: ?So, I?have no job here and nothing holds me to stay in Slovakia, I?want to change the climate, because nothing good is waiting for me here.“ This motive of femcee?s departure is recapitulating in the article many times in various alternatives. Not a?single word is explicitly spoken that, what is introducing the headline at the front-page of newspaper Plus Jeden deň: ?... Gypsies chased her off from Slovakia!“The Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked for the appeal about the objector?s opinion. The newspaper Plus Jeden deň delivered by Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd. didn?t answer the appeal.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that the declaration of the article?s headline at the front page of newspaper communicating, that the femcee Kristina Kormuthova has been chased off from Slovakia by Gypsies is false and misleading. There are absolutely no facts – certified or objective in the article speaking about that Kristina Kormuthova was chased off from Slovakia and absolutely not by Gypsies. This is an apparent antagonism between the headline and article?s content, what is a?frequent aberrance against the Code of Ethics in print media in Slovakia.The newspaper Plus Jeden deň with their relatively high charge distributed all over the Slovakia has a?wide coverage in the community and in this way they are igniting the racist and discriminating tendencies in the community. There is absolutely no qualification of the reality in the article that the femcee as a?worker of the statutory institution, like the RTVS surely is, and so the?social responsibility has been coupled with this case, excessively verbalized the Gypsies at the open accesible social networks.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic reached that by the publication of the article, the redaction of newspaper Plus Jeden deň breached the Code of Ethics of the Journalist, specifically:paragraph IIThe basic attributes1. For or the work of journalist are the first order conditions of personal liberty, justice and respectability. In his work is participating by the enforcement of the following attributes in society.2. The basic attributes for the work of journalist are the neutrality, flexibility, objectivity, honesty, reality, responsibility and consistently reference.Paragraph IIIThe journalist and the public6. The titles of articles or programs can not be misleading or false. The same holds for all types of advertising coupled with articles and programs promotion.Paragraph IV3. He does not instigate the malignance, discrimination or stereotypes formed on race, religion, ethnic, age, social status or sexual orientation. About the minority reference is informing only in case of the report?s relevance.The decisionThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that with the publishing of the article ?The racist“ Kormuthova, Gypsies chased her off from Slovakia! in newspaper Plus Jeden deň from September?11th in 2014 The Code of Ethics of the Journalist was breached. Specifically it was the paragraph II. of the code: The basic attributes, clauses 1 and?2, the paragraph III. of the code: The journalist and the public, clause 6, the paragraph IV. of the code: The journalist and the object of his interest, clause 3.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic pronounced in connection with the noted activity of newspaper Plus Jeden deň a?real roasting.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic along with the decision asked the publisher Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd., for the publication of this decision in the nearest possible edition of the newspaper Plus Jeden deň.CASE STUDY 4: Newspapers Dennik N and SME versus Office of the Government of the Slovak RepublicIntroductionThere was an actuation delivered to the Press Council of the Slovak Republic by Denník N, represented by N Press, Ltd. and?Newspaper SME, represented by Petit Press, Inc., wherein was the Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked to adopt an attitude to the consecution of the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic patterned in the declination of providing any answers to the editors questions.The Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic argued his attitude by the fact, that Newspaper N and?Newspaper SME for a long time slantly informed about the ministry cabinet work, so for that reason the Government of the Slovak Republic does not see any?sense of further communication with it.The procedureThe Newspaper N in the appended appeal introduced, that there were a?lot of cases of information failure during last months, the appelee pointed at those that are illustrating the?systematic admission of the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic to his editors, for example:The question of the editor:?Good afternoon, I?would like to request your point of view to the expression of the Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov, who said, that he expects an arrival of the Prime Minister Robert Fico at the 75th anniversary of the beginning of Second World War.Is that a?true? Is the Prime Minister Robert Fico going to Moscow? Had he to agreed with president and foreign minister and does this mean that the president does not travel to Moscow? Why the Prime Minister travels to Moscow? Is it not better according to him to stay home because of the situation in Ukraine?“The question of the editor:?Is it from the point of view of the Prime Minister that Serbia has arrested a?Slovak citizeness who wanted to protest against breaking human rights in China? Did the Prime Minister know, during his visit in Serbia, about this arrestation? Did he ?protest against it, respectively how did he advanced?The question of editor:?There are a?lot of companies, traders, also mayors, magistrates, who are complaining for the?procedures of Euro-Building company (or Euro-Stukonz). They say that the company is not paying for their services despite the fact that the money come from European funds, respectively there are?problems with finalization of contracts. The case is compared to the Vahostav cause. The businessmen for that reason are creating an association. Has the Prime Minister the information about the problems of businessmen and mayors with the Euro-Building company? Will he deal with it, or more will he solve the problems in some way?The answer of the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic contained involved information:?Good afternoon, the Prime Minister sees no reason to communicate in any form with the Newspaper N, which took off an unprecedented political anti-campaign against the Government of the Slovak Republic. By publishing of specific political labels Newspaper N overstepped the ?borders of professional journalism and freely joined the opposing political parties in the election campaign. And it all happened in spite of the generous gesture from the side of the Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic, who recently started to communicate with the Newspaper N, despite the fact that the redactors did not apologize for the demonstrably false information about the information that he supported Janukovyc?s authoritarianism in Ukraine and about the preparing of the ministrative presidential apartment in mansion in Rusovce. These false information were published by the redactors during their acting in newspaper SME. For that reason we will not answer the questions of Newspaper N.“The Newspaper SME also introduced, that they contacted the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic via their editors, but instead of answering the questions, there were comparable answers delivered to the redaction.The question of editor:?I have a?question to the Application for the organizational and financial securing of the celebrations of the 70th anniversary of the Slovak National Rising, what is currently in making process. Is the Prime Minister Robert Fico planning to set some finance from his reserve for the celebrations as it was by the 65th anniversary of the Slovak National Rising, when he supported it by 17-thousands Euros? If yes how much? Thank you in advance for your answer”.The question of the editor:?Good afternoon, I?would like to request for the answers to these questions: there was an interview with the Prime Minister R. Fico published in the press agency TASS. The Prime Minister is expressing in this interview to the topics of discussion with the Russian president Vladimir Putin in June: We certainly want to devote some care to the topic of gas transit across the Slovakia. We are concerned by the report of Russian side that after the period of 2018-2019 there shall be stopped the transit of gas across the Ukraine. That will cause some?problems for us. Another purpose of my visit is the co-operation in the area of nuclear energy. There exist?quite a lot of further questions: the realisation of the project of cyclotron coupled with the deblocation of Russian credit, the topic the production of the Russian army under license in Slovakia. Let?s talk about the common project of building the wide-gauge railway. Can you confirm that the topic of talks in June will be also the realisation of the project of cyclotron, the tender of the production of the Russian army under license in Slovakia and building the wide-gauge railway? The Prime Minister didn?t inform about these topics in Moscow. If also these topics are on the agenda of the meeting, is it possible to specify where in Slovakia the?Russian army technics can be produced? Is that in harmony with the international agreements and NATO?The question of the editor:?Good afternoon, I?would like to request for the expression for the article I?m preparing. The Prime Minister informed during his journey to Russia in the interview for TASS about the topics that would be a?part of discussion during his next visit in Moscow in June (). He also mentioned the topic of the production of the Russian army under license in Slovakia. In connection with this: The production of what kind of army technic is in interest of the Prime Minister? Where, respectively in which company in Slovakia should be this technics produced? Did the Prime Minister discuss this topic with the concrete Slovak companies which should be interesting in this activity? Wouldn?t such a?production of Russian weapons in our country be in conflict with the international responsibilities of our country?“The answer of the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic contained involved information:?Good afternoon, we will not reply for its questions until the newspaper SME apologize to R. Fico for demonstrably false information about the supporting of Janukovyc?s authoritarianism in Ukraine and about the preparing of ministrative presidential apartment in mansion in Rusovce.”The Press Council of the Slovak Republic asked the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic to make an expression to these appeals including their complements and simultaneously asked the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic to verify in due time, if it wasn?t breached the freedom of press by the admission limitation of the journalists to the information from the side of the Office. The Office of the Government expressed that he doesn?t consider the appeal to be reasonable:?On December 4th 2013 the newspaper SME, at the front-page in the article ?Fico: The Union is enamoured intoself“ published an information about the ?supporting of Fico“ for the former Ukrainian president Viktor Janukovyc in connection with the demonstrations against the rejection of admittance of the Ukraine to the association deal with European Union. But this affirmation was not based on the truth. The Prime Minister, in the discussion of HN Club, from which the introduced article was created, clearly said that according to him ?the association deal should be signed between European Union and Ukraine“ and also condemned the raids against the demonstrants in Kiev in words ?Certainly, concerning to the incidences of police, soldiers, everything must be in conformity with law. If that doesn?t happen like that, it?s always very, very bad.“ The Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic R. Fico has never expressed the ?support for former president Janukovyc, like it was introduced by newspaper SME. But, on the contrary, at the repeated question of the moderator of the HN Club discussion, if he understands the decision of Ukraine not to ratify the association deal with European Union, he answered as follows: ?I told very precisely the?sentence that I?m disappointed that deal between European Union and Ukraine wasn?t signed . I?m sorry about that because our experience from the European Union membership is exclusively positive. I?will not speak about the conditions under which we joined the European Union. We could arrange some different conditions for us. But the decennial membership in European Union is our benefit and each country, also of type of Ukraine, if it joins the European Union, it has to be a benefit for this country. So I?m very sorry about it, but I?have to respect the decision made by Ukraine.” Ergo, the newspaper SME has two times concealed an underscored recall of the Prime Minister about that the deal of Ukraine with European Union would a benefit for the country and he is very sorry for her non-ratification, but the other way round on the ground of the quotations of the Prime Minister ripped from the context, has made self-willed result and false claims about R. Fico?s support of former Ukrainian president Janukovyc. Even an argument that newspaper SME was outgoing from previous news from SITA agency doesn?t stand up because the news contained the?sentence of R. Fico about that he is very sorry for the non-ratification of the association deal between Ukraine and European Union, how?s noted above. Additionally, the close of the daily edition of the newspaper SME is in evening hours, whereby the HN Club discussion was held during morning hours what means that the redaction has enough time and published facts to disposal to validate the information.The Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic has sent on December 4th 2013, in consistence with § 7 of Act legislative Nr. 167/2008 Collection of Laws about the periodical press and news service and about the change and completing of some laws from April 9th 2008, an appeal to the publisher of newspaper SME for the correction of false facts. The newspaper SME didn?t publish the correction.On January 2nd 2014 the newspaper SME, at the front-page in the article ?They stay silent about the donors for mansion“, dealing with the planned reconstruction of historic landmark of mansion in Rusovce, introduced the information that ?there will be a ministrative presidential apartment in it.“ This allegation was not based on truth, while in the official material, passed to the Government of the Slovak Republic, there was no mention about ?the ministrative presidential apartment“ as a?part of reconstructed mansion. Besides the other planned spaces, it was reported in the official material about the?presidential and also royal apartment, that should serve for the accommodation of the most important, in this case state visits of the Slovak Republic, what is usual in all hotels at world standards.The Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic has send on January 7th 2014 consistent with § 7 of Act legislative Nr. 167/2008 Collection of Laws about the periodical press and news service and about the change and completing some laws from April 9th 2008, an appeal to the publisher of newspaper SME for the correction of false facts. The newspaper SME did not publish the correction.With regard to the fact that the newspaper SME is still not prepared, after the period of one year, how it imposes § 7 of Act legislative Nr. 167/2008 Collection of Laws about the periodical press and news service and about the change and completing some laws from April 9th of 2008, to publish the?correction of visibly false facts written by the editors working in newspaper SME and in Newspaper N, the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic and the Prime Minister R. Fico decided to interrupt the?communication with these media, ergo not answer their questions.“The Press Council has for proven, that the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic at the concrete and properly delivered questions by the editors of Newspaper N does not reply and against the answers at these questions provided a?pronouncement by which will not answered at the questions.As it results from the content of e-mails of editors of Newspaper N, the proceed questions were dealing about things belonging to the journalists?right and duty to inform community, because these questions were about the Slovak Prime Minister?s visit of Mosco; then arrest of Slovak citizeness in Serbia; the advancement of Euro-Building company (or Euro-Stukonz), which does not pay its liabilities, what can be compared with the Vahostav causa; about the attendance of Russia in the war in the East of Ukraine. Accordingly also the questions of newspaper SME editors were of legitimate things of interest, because they were about the financing of the Slovak National Rising anniversary celebration, international co-operation between Slovakia and Russia in the area of the army engineering, cyclotron and wide-gauge railway, or more precisely about the suspicions of corruption.Under these circumstances there is doubtless, that non-answering the questions abridged the?free admittance of the journalist to the information for the purpose of additional broadcasting to the public. It?was necessary to deal with the question if such an advance is excusable by the reasons for the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic to decline to provide the information.The Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic rationalized his advance with the fact that in the past the editors of Newspaper N (at that time working for newspaper SMER), or more precisely the editorship of newspaper SME published about the Prime Minister markedly false facts, despite this fact they refused to publish the suggested correction and adduce all things to proper status. Under this situation, the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic, because these journalists were continually slantly informing about the work of ministry, does not see any sense in further communication with Newspaper N, does not communicate with newspaper SME and that position is in order till the newspaper SME apologizes to R. Fico for demonstrably false infomation about R. Fico?s support of Janukovyc?s authoritarianism in Ukraine and about the preparing of ministrative presidential appartment in mansion in Rusovce.The admittance of journalist to the information is limited and it is not possible to explain this journalist?s privilege the way that any public agency is forced to immediately provide any answers at any journalist?s questions and by the form requested by journalist. On the other hand there is not possible to arbitrarily reduce the journalist?s privilege of the admittance to the information and even without sufficient reasons only selectively in relation to the specific media.The limitation of the admittance of the journalist to the information is acceptable only in case when there is expressly specified what information, respectively what advances eliminate providing required information.The rejection of the admittance to the information is absolutely perceivable (even in relation to the journalist) in cases when the object of the information is some kind of secret or protection of legally specified interests of other persons, national security or public order or morality. In different cases there is necessary to compare both values more consistently the way to prevent the arbitrary admittance motivated by the inner aversion of public authorities and their officials in attitude to specific journalist or newspaper.In this case the reason of non-providing of the information should be the former behaviour of the journalist, which published in newspaper the information, they were signed by the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic as false or injurious to the Prime Minister, and the newspaper rejected to publish a correction. But such a reason is not relevant for the rejection of the admittance of the information if the appeal for their providing follows actually faithful goal of the journalist to inform the community about the current events in community or in international context. In this case the honesty of the intention of the journalist to request and utilize the requested information from the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic is not questioned.Due to this situation the advance of the Office of the Government of the Slovak Republic is not acceptable because of superordinating other reasons over the public interest to receive the information through the mediums.The decisionThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic considers the practice of the Press and Information department of the Office of the Government of Slovak Republic as a?breach of freedom of press by the constraint of journalists?s admittance to the information. It was in the consecution of the Office of the Government against the Newspaper Daily N. They say they will not answer any questions of editors of this daily. Instead of that they made a proclamation that they will not communicate with this daily until the editors of this daily apologize to the Prime Minister for their false proclamations about R. Fico?s support of former Ukraine?s president Janukovyc and about the preparing of the ministrative presidential apartment in mansion in Rusovce, that were published by the editors working in Newspaper SME at that time.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic expressed a serious concern with acting of the Office of the Government of Slovak Republic.CASE STUDY 5: Newspaper Plus Jeden deň versus ImmigrantsIntroductionThe appelee objected, that the newspaper Plus jeden deň breached the code of ethics with the headline at the front-page in a?word of ?Sociologist Porubanova: We are threatened by muslim ghettos“ coupled with an article at the 11th page under the headline ?Uphold here their culture?“ published on September 26th in 2015. The appelee introduced, that according to the public figured mistress the ?Headline is directed an effect of threatening Muslim ghettos in our country. The word ?threatened“ in Slovakian can be understood in two concepts: at first, that the ghettos are threatening us in the way how the immigrants will be dislocated into the ghettos or outside them. Or it can be percepted, and that is more probable, because of the general feeling in our community, that we shall certainly have the ghettos if we accept immigrants, or shall not if we don?t accept them. ... Simply, that?s the way how to bring the anxiety into the community, what is in conflict with ethic and responsible journalism”.The procedure (Human Rights)The Press Council of the Slovak Republic has demanded to make a statement to the objector?s opinion. The newspaper Plus Jeden deň delivered by ?Spolo?nos? 7 plus, Ltd.“ didn?t answered the appeal. The Press Council so exploited his authority to decide about the appeal without the objector?s expression.Paragraph IIIThe journalist and the public6. The titles of articles or programs can not be misleading or false. The same holds for all types of advertising coupled with articles and programs promotion.Paragraph IVThe journalist and the object of his interests3. He does not instigate the malignance, discrimination or stereotypes formed on race, religion, ethnic, age, social status or sexual orientation. About the minority reference is informing only in case of the report?s relevance.The Press Council was acquainted with the content of article and concentrated its attention on the article?s headline published at the main page in keeping with the appeal. The single article is an interview with the sociologist on the topic of the incorporation of immigrants in Europe. The appeal corresponds at first with the?question and the answer in the interview:The question:Will the immigrants prefer the life among their own people after the arrival in Slovakia or another country or they will part and adapt to a new environment?The answer of Silvia Porubanova:That?s at first the question of the arrangement of immigration system in the country of the arrival. It has been proved in Europe the distraction of the immigrants among the majority population in past decades. So the operative integration runs than faster. In the case of creation of segregate settlements sooner or later the problems typical for ghettos are threatening us.The headline with the article?s connection published at the front page of the newspaper has a?character of constatation: ?Sociologist Porubanova: We are threatened by muslim ghettos“, what does not correspond with the interview?s content. In the answer the sociologist pronounces the alternatives of possible progress, but the headline at the main page is negating it with its character in the diameter of constatation.How results from paragraph III. clause 6 of the Code of Ethics of Journalist, it is necessary to appreciate the titles / headlines / of articles not only in the context of full articles, but also separately. The reason is relatively independent working / influencing / of the titles / headlines / at the part of readers. The reason is relatively independent influencing a?part of readers by the headlines / titles /. Especially it works by the titles / headlines / presented at the main / front / page separately from the article.The Press Council consequently rated the objecting headline by the criteria noted in paragraph IV. clause 3 of the Code of Ethics of Journalist. An incitement to hatred by the religious ground with the title in newspaper is according to the Press Council a?substantial breach of the rules of press ethics. Using the word of ?muslim“ in the headline at the main / front / page is considered by the Press Council for inappropriate and allegate in respect of the fact, that in the article this word does not appear. The context of the objective article even does not contain the religious aspect, the content of the article is balanced. The Press Council considers, that the applying of the word ?muslim“ in the headline at the main / front / page was motivated by the ambition of readers acquirement respectively the consumer?s newspaper choice.The decisionThe Press Council of the Slovak Republic established, that the newspaper Plus jeden deň with the part at the front-page in a?word of ?Sociologist Porubanova: We are threatened by muslim ghettos“ coupled with an article at the 11th page under the headline ?Uphold here their culture?“ published on September 26th in 2015 reneged on paragraph III. clause 6 in conjunction with the paragraph IV. clause 3. of the Code of Ethics of the Journalist.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic pronounced to the newspaper Plus jeden deň a disconcertion.The Press Council of the Slovak Republic called the newspaper Plus jeden deň to inform about this decision in its nearest edition.THE CASE OF POLANDEthics in journalism certainly is an issue in Poland. Although the legislation in this domain is scarce and basis mostly on internal ethical codes proper to particular TV, papers or media groups. There is no universal ethic code accepted by all publishers, and there is no one universal organisation which could oversee how the ethical principles are observed.The Press LawThe still acting press law comes from 1984 and was voted under former communist regime. The law was amended several times but its core dates back from before political transformation and, which is maybe even more important, from a totally different epoch in the development of media. From before the digital revolution.Within the press law there are several articles connected to ethical issues. One is art. 10. Point 1 of this article says: Every journalist is obliged to serve society and state. He has to act according to the professional ethics and rules of social conduct, within the limits of law. Point 2 of the same article says that journalist should respect the editorial policy of his title.Everybody acquainted with journalism knows that point 1 and 2 might be contradictory but the law doesn’t specify what a journalist should do in case of such conflict.Also article 12 point 1 concerns ethics. It says that journalist is obliged to:- Stay honest and reliable while collecting and using his press material, in particular he should check whether the information he got is true and he should mention its source.- Protect personality rights and personal interests of his informers and of everybody who placed their confidence with him.- Use proper language and avoid obscenity and vulgarismsPoint 2 of the same article says that journalist cannot lead hidden advertising activity and take money or any other benefit from any person or institution interested in advertising.The press law contains also a very broad section focusing on authorization. Article 14 point 2 says that journalist cannot deny authorization to a person who he directly quotes in his text if the sentence was not previously quoted somewhere else. (In addition article 49 says that publishing a statement without authorization might be punishable, a journalist might even go to jail for that).This paragraph is going to be amended because, according to the verdict issued by the European Court of Human Rights (Wizeraniuk vs Poland, published in 2011) it runs counter the principal rule of freedom of speech. Wizeraniuk was a journalist who had published an interview with a politician without waiting for him to authorize the text. The politician went to court. Finally the proceeding against Wizeraniuk was suspended but the journalist had to pay 1000 zlotys (240 euro) for “social objectives”. ECHR founded this sentence to severe and blamed the Polish court for not taking into account that what Wizeraniuk wrote was right and that the politician he has interviewed was a public servant.Now, the Polish ministry of culture prepared an amendment to the press law in order to change the rules of authorization. The main change consists of introducing time limits for authorization. The interviewed will have from one (daily newspapers) to three days (magazines) for sending the authorized version. Many journalist say it is a move toward right direction but underline that 24 hours for a daily is still too much time. They also say that authorization is a very Polish specific almost non-existent in the West.Another issue that causes a lot of controversy is the right to corrections and rectifications. The articles 31 and 32 of the press law oblige editors in chef to publish corrections. The are some guidelines concerning form and length of corrections as well as time to send them to the editorial office but the question of its truthfulness is only vaguely mentioned. This caused a lot of discussion and controversies during the last 25 years.In the era of social media and digitalisation the art. 45 of the law is also worth mentioning as an extremely out of date one. It says that person publishing an unregistered journal or magazine shall be subject to a fine. Blogs and even sometimes some social media activity might be considered as such unregistered journals.Radio and Television LawThe law was voted in December 1992 and amended several times for the last 25 years. Its article 3 says that if the law doesn’t specify the regulations from the press law apply to the radio and television broadcasting.The body which has to do with ethics as far as the radio and television are concerned is the National Broadcasting Council. Article 6 says that the main task of the Council is to protect freedom of speech and broadcaster independence, interests of viewers and listeners as well as open and pluralistic character of radio and television.The Council has 5 members, two are appointed by Sejm (low chamber of the Polish parliament), one by Senat (upper chamber of the parliament) and two by the president.Article 18 specifies that programs broadcasted by radio and TV cannot promote activities which are against Polish law and Polish national interests, and cannot promote opinions which are against morality and public’s concerns, which encourage hate and include or promote any discrimination based on racial or ethnic origin, disability, sex, religion or nationality.Article 21 focuses on public radio and television. It says that they realise public mission by offering differentiated programs characterised by pluralism, impartiality, accuracy and independence as well as innovativeness, high standarts and integrity of the message. Programs broadcasted by public radio and television should “reflect the whole complexity of events and phenomena in Poland and abroad”, foster freedom of opinions and public debate, encourage the development of culture, science and education with particular focus on Polish intellectual and artistic heritage. They should respect Christian values and observe global principles of ethics, strengthen families, strengthen healthy activates and promote sport, encourage media awareness.The National Broadcasting Council can fine the broadcaster or even deprive him of his broadcasting license. The problem with the Council was that it was always very politicised. The way its members are elected implies their political bias.The latest amendments to the law (dating form 2016) introduced a different, even more politically dependent, system of electing the authorities of public radio and television. Council of National Media has been created. It has 5 members. Three of them were elected by Sejm, (these are deputies of the ruling party Prawo i Sparwiedliwo??), two were suggested by the opposition and nominated by the president.The Council of National Media appoints and dismisses members and president of the management boards of the public radio and television as well as the members of supervisory boards.Both current presidents of the public radio (Jacek Sobala) and television (Jacek Kurski) are ferocious enthusiasts of the current government, the president of Television is even a former member of the governing party and active politician. It calls into question impartiality and independence of the public media in Poland.Code of Ethics in MediaOther regulations concerning ethics in media in Poland are not universally binding. Among the most common and general ones was a document signed in 1995 and called Ethic Code of Media.In the group who initiated works on the Code were publishers, broadcasters (with the biggest one - Polish Public Television), journalistic associations and trade unions. Among them some famous Polish journalists and publishers, like Jerzy Turowicz, the almost legendary editor in chief of “Tygodnik Powszechny” the weekly which under communism was one of the most liberal and brave titles in the whole socialist Eastern Bloc. The group was under strong influence of the liberal catholic milieu. Among the signatories of the Code was bishop Wies?aw Niew?g?owski, the official catholic chaplain of creative circles, and Catholic Association of Journalists.The Code established 7 general rules:- Truthfulness- Objectivism- Separation of information and commentary- Honesty (it is acting according to journalist’s own conscience and the well-being of the recipients, not giving into external pressure, and renouncing acts running against personal convictions)- Respect and tolerance- Primacy of the recipients’ well-being (it is that the rights of readers, viewers and listeners are more important that the rights of journalists, editors, publishes and broadcasters)- Freedom and accountability (it is that media are responsible for what they publish and how they do it)The signatories of the Code appointed Council of Ethics in Media supposed to supervise the implementation of the rules. The Council was given the right to publish decisions and to interpret the proscriptions of the Code.Members of the Council were elected by a coalition of publishers, broadcasters and journalistic activists working on the Code and grouped in an umbrella organisation called Conference of Polish Media. Polish Public Television, Public Radio and TV Polsat (the biggest commercial TV at that time) were members of the Conference. But for example “Gazeta Wyborcza”, the biggest Polish daily, was not.Members of the Council, who were mostly retired journalist belonging to the older generation, worked without remuneration, pro publico bono. The costs connected to the activity of the Council were covered by the organisations members of the Conference. During each term in office the Council was hosted by a different organisation. For many years it was the Public Television who sponsored its activity providing Council members not only with a little office, computers, phones and a printer but also with subscription of press titles and a professional secretary supposed to organise the office’s work. Later it was Association of Polish Journalists which could not afford spending that much money, so the conditions in which members of the Council worked, were deteriorated.According to Ryszard Bańkowski, the current chairman of the Council and its long-time member, the Council reacted (by publishing its decisions and statements) only after receiving a complaint. As the Council was never considered universal it was very often treated as a tool in journalistic rivalry and political games.The case which started in 2009 was a serious damage to the Council’s reliability and put under question it professionalism and impartiality. In 2009 the Council published a decision concerning investigative journalism. It claimed that two authors: Anna Marsza?ek i Bertold Kittel from journal “Rzeczpospolita” discredited investigative journalism by writing text “Kasjer z Ministerstwa Obrony” (Cashier from the ministry of defence). The text was published in “Rzeczpospolita” in 2001 and described corruption in the ministry accusing the than deputy minister Romuald Szeremietiew. The investigation didn’t prove Szeremietiew’s personal responsibility for the abnormalities and found him not guilty. Right after the verdict the Council published its decision and then the two journalists accused the Council claiming that the decision violated their personal rights.The journalists went to court. In 2013 the District court in Warsaw ordered Magdalena Bajer, Maciej I?owiecki and Helena Kowalik-Cie?lik (the charwoman, the deputy chairman and the secretary of the Council) to publish apologies. The Supreme court confirmed the earlier verdict.The lawsuit revealed also that the Council of Ethics in Media and the Conference of Polish Media lack the legal base for their activity and gave an impulse to reform the institution.The new host of the Council, another journalistic association – Association of Journalists of the Republic of Poland – undertook steps to accord some formal status to the Council. The association Conference of Polish Media was registered and one of its tasks was to appoint the Council.Unfortunately at that time the journalistic milieu was already very divided and antagonism between different journalistic associations became deep and paralysing any possibility of common action.Association of Polish Journalist and Journalistic SocietyThe rest of the regulations has a limited scope. They apply only to members of particular journalistic organisations or particular media groups. Taking into account the fact that the journalistic organisations lost their universal character and authority the importance of such codes is very limited.The codes resemble each other. Their authors very often quote the BBC editorial guidelines as their point of reference.One of such codes was written by the Association of Polish Journalist. In the 1990 the Association was one of the biggest organisations of that type in Poland. It assembled journalists from different media: press, radio and television and with different ideological background. Few years ago the organisation started to become deeply divided. The antagonism became invincible after the tragic event from April 2010 – the catastrophe of the Polish plane with the presidential couple, politicians, activists and military officials on board. Among journalists, as well as among politicians, the main cleavage concerned the possibility that the accident was in fact a terrorist attack. Few right wing journalists in the leadership of the organisation started to promote the thesis of the terrorist attack. In 2012 Cezary Gmyz published in “Rzeczpospolita” a text claiming that there were traces of explosives on the plane’s wrack.Afterwards the publisher of the journal licenced Gmyz, and the editor in chief and the editor of the politics department of the journal, claiming that the journalist didn’t have enough credible data to publish such a text.The Association started defending Gmyz and engaged in his dispute with his publisher. Many journalists having opposite political views stared to quit the organisation believing that it became too politically biased on the side of Prawo i Sparwiedliwo?? (than in the opposition, nowadays the governing party).In 2012 a group of journalist, mostly linked to liberal titles, as “Gazeta Wyborcza” (daily) and “Polityka” (weekly) established a new organisation called Journalistic Society. Seweryn Blumsztajn, from “Gazeta Wyborcza” explained their decision as follows: “The political divisions among journalists are much deeper than among politicians. Politicians are forced to collaborate with each other. We are not. The amount of slurs addressed to each other becomes insupportable. The only way to coexist somehow is to regroup separately and then talk to each other. We can not remain in one organisation any more. The Association of Polish Journalist is a fiction”.The Association has a special Code of journalistic ethics. Its article 6 says that privacy and intimacy can not by violated. The only exception might be for investigative journalism. According to article 10 Journalist should show respect to everybody despite ideological, cultural and lifestyle differences, but is not obliged to share their views. Article 11 asks to pay special attention in order not to offend disabled, old, ill and helpless persons. Article 17 stays that journalistic credibility and independence can not be combined with accepting valuable gifts (worth more than 50 euros), free journeys and testing items or engines. Article 19 condemns hidden advertising. Article 21 says that journalists should avoid direct political and party activity in order to avoid conflict of interests. Article 22 concerns relation between colleagues. It condemns unfair competition and stealing other’s texts and ideas.The Journalistic Society is not that detailed about ethic rules. It doesn’t have any special ethic code. Only the status of the Society precises that “the aim of the organisation is to bring together the journalistic milieu, promote high standards in media and create a platform for exchanging views and defense freedom of speech”.There are other journalistic associations. Some of them also have their codes of ethics. Generally, the influence of such organizations is very limited. Even those journalists who nominally are members of an organization don’t take part in the organization’s activity. The majority of professionally active journalists never belonged to any organization of this kind.Codes of ethics proper to particular titles or media groupsMany papers, radios and televisions have their own codes of ethic or some rules concerning ethics included in their editorial guidelines. If a given title belongs to a big media group it is supposed to obey a general code for the media group. For example Polish titles of The Ringier Axel Springer group have its special Code of Conduct.The general rules from those codes are similar to the rules listed in the 7 point Code of Ethics in Media which I have described above. They all mention what the Ringier Axel Springer Code calls “truth and faithful handling of the facts” as the core of journalistic work.All codes forbid journalists to suppress or distort facts, publish inaccurate information or mix information with commentary. All codes encourage journalists to verify information, avoid publishing news from unknown sources and generally be sceptical towards his sources of information.Important values mentioned in such codes are independence and fairness. Not all mention impartiality but most ask journalists to present the whole spectre of opinions concerning the described case. The internal guideline for the journalists of “Gazeta Wyborcza” comprised such sentence: “Every person or institution which is criticized or accused by someone has to be given a chance to reply. If the journalist is not able to contact the accused he has to write it clearly and use a quotation form another source or from previous texts”. It also asks its journalist to ?refer opinions which we don’t agree with. Not only describing them, but also in the form of documents, interviews and texts”. But it also mentions that those opinions must be “important or propagated by important groups or people and they can not encourage violence, hate or denigrate people”.All codes condemn mixing advertising with editorial content, all call for respect toward intellectual property. “Every journalist must at all times avoid plagiarism and respect the intellectual property of other persons. In particular, every journalist shall respect copyright and copyright provisions of?agreements and use excerpts of another person’s work (e.g. text, audio, video) only if the source is clearly indicated or if the author has approved such publication” says the the Ringier Axel Springer Code while “Gazeta Wyborcza” encourages its journalists: “Refer to other media if they were first to describe what you write about”.Not every title has its proper code. For example I was told by the editorial secretary of the weekly “Polityka” that the title doesn’t have its particular code of ethics. They only have a special team in the editorial office dedicated to solve so called “difficult questions”.Also “Rzeczpospolita” and “W Sieci” don’t have special codes of ethics.What’s important: many journalists working for titles having their proper codes are not aware such codes even exists. Of course many rules listed in the codes apply in the editorial daily practices but nobody asks newly hired journalists to read such codes, nobody refers to those codes.Codes of conduct in social mediaIn the last few years many editorial offices obliged its journalists to observe certain rules in social media. In 2012 private television TVN send to its employees a document called “Rules of activity in social media” which consisted of 10 points:Remember that in social media you also represent TVN Publishing content in social media, even on your own profile you still are a journalist Obey journalistic standards, especially the rule of impartiality Do not publish in social media any information or opinion which you wouldn’t share on TV Don’t post anything that could undermine your credibility or credibility of you colleagues from TVN Think before you post, share or accept a friends request Protect private and confidential information which was not published on TV Take into account that everything which you post might get public Take into account that everything you have ever posted may last forever In case of any doubts ask your supervisor The rules caused a lot of controversy, especially its points 2 and 3. Some journalist say it deprives them of private life.In 2016 a similar document was prepared by the editors in chief of “Gazeta Wyborcza”. Comparing to the TVN’s one it is however not that radical and gives to its journalists more scope to express their own views. In the beginning the document reminds: “In social media you still are journalists, you use the same name with which you sign your publication - the name you work for. Other internet users perceive you as the same journalist, editor or publisher even if you post in your leisure time. You are perceived as the voice of >Gazeta Wyborcza<. You have to be aware of this”. Later it also asks: Do not leave any doubt that published content is your personal opinion, not that of the company [the publiser of “Gazeta Wyborcza”, Agora S.A.]. The indications are very detailed. There is even a warning: “be careful with irony and hermetic joke, they can be easily misunderstood”.Common violations of rulesAll the above mentioned rules are violated. There are no media free from bad practices, be this press journal, TV or radio station. Here I would like to give just a few examples of violating ethic standards.Independence and impartiality These rules are very often violated. While watching, listening or reading to Polish media one almost never has doubts what is the opinion of journalist concerning the presented issue. Mixing information with opinion is a common practise. It is particularly dangerous in case of public media. Public television was always more pro-government than pro - opposition but since the last parliamentary election and the change of television law it is particularly visible.The most bright example is the main information programme “Wiadomo?ci” (the News) aired at 7 30 PM on channel 1 of the public television. It constantly ignores information about opposition actions. When there are organised marches and demonstrations against the government policy the programme calls them marginal. If it can not ignore them, as it was with the black protest of women against the proposal of a new abortion law, the information about the protesters is very biased and presents them in a negative perspective.During the NATO summit, in Warsaw in Jully 2016, “Wiadomo?ci” distorted the sense of president Barck Obama’s speech delivered at a press conference alongside with the Polish president Andrzej Duda. Obama said that he: “expressed to President Duda our concerns over certain actions and the impasse around the Poland’s Constitutional Tribunal.” And added that: “More work needs to be done.” In the news presented by “Wiadomo?ci” the main message was that Obama prised Polish democracy. The sentence spoken by Obama which sounded: “Poland stands and needs to continue stand as an example for democratic practices around the world.” was translated: “Poland is and will be an example of democracy for the whole world.”Later the “Washington Post” published a text “Obama slammed Polish democracy on Friday. Here’s how Polish TV proved him right” in which journalist Michael Birnbaum described the manipulation. “Wiadomo?ci” in a material prepared by its journalist Marcin Tulicki suggested that the “Washington Post” published this text because of Anne Appelbaum, wife of the former polish minster of foreign affairs, who works for the journal.Paid advertising There are a lot of ethical controversies concerning violations of this rule. In one domain it is particularly delicate and difficult to judge: in culture. As the press crisis becomes more acute the editors in chief have less and less money to spend on preparing text. In many editorial offices culture is not a priority. An investigative journalist will be given some extra money to go after his heroes, to visit the places he need to describe in his text. A journalist covering culture can not count on the same understanding. Editorial offices avoid to cover travel costs if a journalist wants to go to another country in order to interview a writer or a film director.But the publishers and distributors do it voluntarily. They buy tickets, hotels and even sometimes cover other travel expenses of journalists who agree to interview their authors or actors staring in films they distribute. The result is such that books and films which get the biggest and best media coverage are not those which are the most valuable or important but those which have rich publishing houses or distributors ready to pay (even if indirectly) journalist to write about them.The BBC media guidelines in the section “Editorial integrity and Independence from External Interests” says: “We should not normally accept expenses paid trips unless they are the only way to cover a significant event, such as an inaugural flight or voyage or military operation”. Despite the fact that almost all Polish editors and journalists mention BBC standards as their point of reference, in Polish media such practices are part of daily routine. If Polish reader or listener reads or listens to an interview with a foreign writer or actor or film director or musician he may be pretty sure that this is because a Polish publisher or distributor payed for the journalist’s trip to the interview.Respecting Intellectual Property Many Codes of ethics and editorial guidelines underline that the most valuable texts or programs are those based on journalist’s own research. But here again the press crisis has its impact. The original texts are much more expensive. It is easier and first of all cheaper to put a journalist in front of a computer than to send him to the field. Especially if it is far away in another country or even another continent. In the last few months the biggest Polish daily – “Gazeta Wyborcza” - licensed all its foreign correspondents. Most of the other journals did it many years ago. In result most of the texts in Polish media covering the world are a compilation of the articles published online in foreign media. It happens that the Polish authors don’t even mention the original titles where the story they describe was first published.The problem is particularly acute in the section of features and reportages. Producing a good, decent reportage costs money and time. Many even most famous Polish reporters have been accused of copying someone else’s books, texts or films without even quoting the copied material as their source of inspiration.In 2014 Jacek Hugo-Bader a very well-known polish reporter published a book about a team of Polish Hymalaists who went to Broad Peak to find the corpses of their friends who died while ascending the mountain one year before. Two other journalists Bartek Dobroch and Przemys?aw Wilczyński who wrote another book about the same event found in Hugo-Bader’s text fragments of their own book cited in extenso without even quotation marks.Another example concerns Witold Szab?owski who took part in a joint project of a Publishing House “Czarne” and The Foundation for Polish-German Cooperation. He wrote a reportage for a book with texts about Germans helping Poles during 1980. After the book was published the Foundation discovered that Szab?owski in his text quotes sentences from a film as if it were words he collected himself during his interviews.ConclusionThe violations I described above are only a few examples. There are a lot more of cases of acting against the ethical standards. The responsibility for violating the rules lies on every part of the journalistic process: journalists, editors and publishers. Some are caused by financial shortcomings, some by the acute political rivalry and the fact that media became part of it.All the problems are not only Polish particularity. “Today, when somebody reads our 7 rules, thinks this is as a joke. They seem so unrealistic, so far from the everyday practices” – said Ryszard Bańkowski from the Council of Ethics in Media.THE CASE OF HUNGARYIntroductionKey figures of the Hungarian media established Editors’ Forum in 2012 and prepared and accepted a set of common ethical standards. They have done so mainly because that it is the shared interest of journalists and their audience to have a set of values that are widely shared across newsrooms, independently from platform, genre, target group, size, philosophy, political affiliations or style. And if so, these values need to be transparent and journalists should be accountable to them.In 2015 they brought the ethical standards to a new level. They took ethical responsibility to everything published by launching a new self-regulatory framework under the brand name Korrektor. This initiative aims to hold the members of the organization accountable by the public. The audience can file ethical complaints on-line and the organization processes these complaints by a public procedure. At the end of the process an ethical council of three people makes a decision. Both parties have a right to apply, in which case the board of the organization revisits the complaint and the decision of the council.This paper sums up the values of the ethical guidelines, the most relevant cases and the lessons learned after the first full year of the new complaint procedure and the decisions and special guidelines of the Editor’ Forum.The GuidelinesThe Ethical Guidelines, approved by the founders after almost six years of preparation, describes the internal and external preconditions of honest journalistic work. This includes balanced reporting, fact-checking, the handling of information, the protection of sources, conflict of interest, the divide between journalistic work and advertising and other subjects.The preamble of the guidelines states that “we recognize and protect the freedom of the press. The most important mission of the media is providing information that helps the public to make decisions, be them on the community or the individual level, from elections to parenting. The media has to trigger the exchange of thoughts, the flow of information and opinions across the society and to help the society to understand itself. This mission can only accomplished though if it is based on the trust of the audience. Some of the recent financial, legal and technological trends and developments can potentially undermine the ethical nature of journalism – that’s why the Editors’ Forum finds it of high importance to stand by the fundamental values of the press. Editors who join this initiative all publish in their respective media the ethical guidelines they have agreed to follow and make it available for the public. They agree to handle ethical complaints transparently and honestly. The ethical standards shall be annually reviewed and re-approved.Further goals of the Editors’ Forum are:? To launch and maintain a full scale self-regulation system? To foster the teaching of ethics in journalism education? to prepare, analyse and widely discuss relevant ethical case studies and to help bith journalists and the public to approach them? To improve the public trust in journalism? Ethical training and counselling of journalistsKorrektor, The Media Self-Regulation Platform December 2015 Korrektor, the new platform for media self-regulation, has been launched by a wide professional coalition, including the Editors’ Forum, the Association of Hungarian Publishers and The Association of Hungarian Content Providers. The platform also cooperates with the Association of Hungarian Journalists, the Community of Hungarian Journalists, The Association of Hungarian Catholic Journalists, The Journalists’ Union and the Association of Hungarian Journalists of Romania and the Self_regulating Body of Advertisers.Self-Regulation means ethical guidelines approved and safeguarded by a wide coalition of media stakeholders and is based on a commonly prepared and approved Code of Ethics.Self-Regulation aims to settle debates based on cooperation rather than legal action. It is a faster, more flexible and cheaper solution for the complainant than the juridical way. Complaints are processed through mediation and complaint councils the outcome of which are accepted by the members.Launching the platform was a major step after accepting the Ethical Guidelines in 2012 towards a responsible, transparent and accountable media.III.1. Fundamental rules of self-regulation platform? Preconditions to file a complaintAny publication can be subject of a complaint if the complainant considers it to be against the Ethical Guidelines. Any natural person or legal body has a right to file a complaint. The procedure is for free.? The procedureAfter a complaint is filed, the fact that a procedure has been started is published on the website. It is followed by a meditation stage, if the parties are willing to mediate. A mediator is chosen from the public list. The mediator helps the parties, that is the complainant and the media outlet the subject of complaint is, to reach an agreement. The parties can make any agreement. If the parties reach one and declare that they have no further unsolved issues with each other, the process is successfully closed. The fact that an agreement has been made is published, but the content of the agreement is only public if the parties agree to publish it.The Complaints CouncilIf the parties are not willing to mediate or negotiate, or the mediation is unsuccessful, the complaint is forwarded to Complaints Council. The Councils makes a decision based on documents. Personal hearings can held, but it’s not automatically necessary. The Council’s decision includes a detailed justification and is be definition to be published. The decision should include all the examined aspects and points of the Ethical Guidelines. It can also include general remarks on good and bad practices and journalism itself.Concequences of a processThe Councils itself publishes the decisions. If the complaint is upheld, the respective media outlet must publish it, too. If it fails to publish it, three other members, picked by the Council, will step in to publish the decision. If the complaint is refused, the media outlet is free to publish it. The parties have 5 working days after the decision to appeal. The appeals are reviewed by the board of Editors’ Forum.If a complaint is targeted at a media outlet that is not a member of the self-regulating platform, it shall be asked whether they are willing to face the complaint. If they are, the complaint can be processed. If they refuse, the process is stopped. In certain cases, if the case is of larger importance or is of general public interest, the Editors’ Forum can publish a statement, but it has no further formal consequence regarding the media outlet.III.2. Experiences of the first year of the platformLet’s begin with statistics: 18 complaint have been filed in the course of the first year. 11 complaints had to be refused due to formal reasons. 7 cases have been resolved. 1 out of these has been resolved at the mediation stage. No complaints have been upheld.Most of the complaints have been filed in the first four months after the launch due to the communication buzz around the newness of the platform. It has been an important lesson to learn: constant communication is key to keep the audience active. The fact that no complaints have been upheld is probably also a discouraging fact. Upheld complaints are news, refused complaints are not. We encourage our members to actively advertise the platform but only few of them did so. (A good example is Swedish daily Expressen, where on the bottom of every article the reader can find information on where to turn in case of ethical issues).The 7 cases that have been processedAll 7 processed complaints were referring to the “honest reporting” paragraph of the code of ethics. This paragraph states that reporting must be? accurate? unbiased? making a clear distinction between facts and opinions? fair, respecting privacy and dignity of all? brave, not discouraged by conflicts or obstacles? free of manipulation, not influencing the flow of events, only reporting on it? uncorrupted, not buying or selling information, not taking advantage of the power of the media? avoiding conflict of interest? serving the audience and remain free of influence of any other kind.Agreement was reached at the mediation stage in one case. Other complaints were refused as the council found them ethically right.Experiences regarding the procedure formalities:Experiences of the first year helped a lot to recognize the minor mistakes in the procedure through the actual cases and fine tune the rules. Most if these fine tunings refer to deadlines, and the time frame for mediation or picking the mediator.The actual cases are described in details among the case studies.Special guidelines and principles The Editor’s Forum has published statements and guidelines in several cases. Here is a summary of those.IV.1. Recommendation on media transparencyWhen a member organization, online outlet VS.hu made news by its publisher receiving half a billion forints (1,6 million EUR) from a fund of the Central Bank of Hungary in secret without the journalist knowing it, most of the staff has quit in outrage and the case shook the media market. This triggered a debate on the transparency of media finances and media ownership. The Editors’ Forum published a statement suggesting the Parlament legal action to create a law on the transparency of media ownership transparency and state financing of media outlets. This would mean that real owners of every media outlet should be known by the public and every year media outlets would be forced to publish a report on their revenues provided by any kind of state body, including governmental institutions, state companies, local authorities or city councils. This would decrease the vulnerability of journalists, and increase transparency and the trust of the public in the media.IV.2. Editors’ Forum condemned governmental favourism and restrictions in access to events of public importanceEditors’ Forum issued a statement agains any restrictions applied by state institutions or political bodies. This statement was published after some news outlets were not let in to report on the annual “state of the country” speech of the Prime Minister due to what was called ‘technical reasons’. In picking the respective outlets who were not let in, the political favouritism was obvious.IV.3. Etikai szempontok véleménycikk esetében – kiszolgáltatott csoportokra vonatkozó etikai szabályokThe Bureu for National and Ethnic Minority Rights filed a complaint against an op-ed article written written by Zsolt Bayer in daily Magyar Hírlap and titled ‘Who Shall Not Be?”. They argued that the article’s tone and and content were harming the roma community and encouraged hate, exclusion and violence against them, thus being against the ethical guidelines.Magyar Hírlap was and is not a member of the ethical platform and they have not accepted the ethical guidelines. Desptie this, the Editors’ Forum decided to issue a statement due to the general importance of the issues raised. It stated that although the opinion shall be in general free and most of the guidelines is irrelevant in terms of op-ed pieces, there shall be certain ethical limitations. The Forum stated that the article harmed the ethical guidelines by generalizing the roma people through condemning one certain crime case and is using rude and violent expressions regarding the romas as group in general. The author also mixes facts with opinion and is totally exaggerating and lacks accuracy. The use of words is clearly violent and encourages aggression which is unacceptable in general and especially when it is aimed at minorities and ethnic groups who are extremely vulnerable. It is a clear goal of the article to provoke hate. The statement makes several general remarks regarding the limit between harsh and provocative opinion and hate speech.IV.7. Quoting and copy-paste journalismThe Editors’ Forum issued special guidelines regarding plagiarism and copy-paste journalism. It sets the rules on fair quotation and reference to avoid making advantage of others’ efforts.Case StudiesCase 1: HIV and privacy sensitive informationBlikk, the most popular daily tabloid in Hungary published a sequence of articles on a Hungarian singer infected with HIV. Though the identity of the affected singer wasn’t revealed the articles gave details on the illness, its circumstances and the hospital treatment of the young singer known from a talent show.The information sources were the employees of the hospital, telling the newspaper that the disease was sexually transmitted years ago, and that the singer could be cured. The news swept over a significant part of domestic media, and the columnist of the newspaper commented on the articles on a morning talk show of a commercial TV channel.At the same time, voices sharply criticizing the tabloid for the articles appeared. Another singer of the talent show, the head of the Drogriporter (drug policy website of the?Rights Reporter Foundation), and the National Association of Hungarian Journalists also lifted up their voice.The Hungarian National?Authority?for Data Protection and Freedom of Information issued a communication in which it drew attention to the protection of privacy and the responsibility of healthcare workers and media.An individual, who was not involved in the case, filed a complaint, for breaching of professional ethical rules and asked for the investigation of the case.As part of the procedure, personal consultations were held between Blikk and the complainant, which was concluded with a successful agreement: on the basis of the complainant’s suggestion, Blikk has made a commitment to publish a positive article providing information on hospitals treating HIV infected patients. The purpose and main message of the article was to strengthen confidence in the healthcare workers. The article was published, the procedure was closed.The media and the articles Blikk is a daily tabloid with print and online content. In addition to the entertainment content, they also deal with politics and sports. Nearly 130,000 print newspapers are purchased daily, online access is larger, nearly one and a half million follow the content. Their presence in social media is also active, and currently 516,000 people ?like” the site.The articles:? The star singer is infected with HIV for many years (Release date: 2016.02.02.), ? The singer infected with HIV appeared in a talent show (Release date: 2016.02.03.), content was taken over by the majority of media: hvg.hu, origo.hu, 444.hu, index.hu, femcafe.hu, 24.hu, nlcafe.hu, hirstart.hu, tények.hu, ripost.hu, kisalf?ld.hu, propeller.hu, filmsor.hu, celebrium.hu, szeretlekmagyarorszag.hu, hirzona.hu, civilhir.hu, kiskegyed.hu, 888.hu.Content of the complaint After a few days following the publication of the article, an individual who was not affected by the story made a complaint at Korrektor. He was complaining of the series of articles in many respects: he referred to the Code of Ethics as a breach of conscientious coverage of events:?Based ont he description the HIV infected singer could be identified almost 100% . Of course she cannot file a legal complaint because her name was not written down. This I think is a typical example of “law-abiding” that the Code of Ethics should prevent. Furthermore the disclosure of the infection does not serve any public interest.2. It causes a great deal of damage to the social judgment of an otherwise stigmatized disease. When it comes to HIV infection, it is critical to turn to a doctor. First to prevent further infections and to start early treatment. This article destroys trust in doctors and healthcare workers, resulting that the infected people do not dare to go to a doctor.”Procedure, conciliation, agreement Blikk is not a member of the self-regulatory body, however decided to make a submission, so the procedure could start.In the present case, a personal consultation was held between Blikk’s journalist editor and the complainant, which appeared to be unsuccessful at first round. The parties ended the first consultation with an agreement that the complainant will make an offer, which will be considered by Blikk’s editorial staff.The complainant’s constructive suggestion was that Blikk should write a positive article providing information on hospitals treating HIV infected patients. The purpose and main message of the article was to strengthen confidence in the healthcare workers. The suggestion was accepted by Blikk and published an article on the prevention of HIV.The result of the agreementTitle: Fast testing can save lives (subtitle: 300 Hungarians are infected with HIV easóch year), Release: May 13. 2016. closing the case, the Editors’ Forum put together a manual on AIDS reporting. The material published referred to privacy, the right to anonymity, the danger of stigmatization, avoiding sensationalism, combatting prejudice, use of language, and reporting on sensitive minority groups in general.CASE 2: VACCINATION-SKEPTICS AND ACCURACYA complaint was filed against an article reporting on and epidemic in Ukraine. The title was “State of Emergence in Ukraine accounced by WHO”. The media outlet, Index is one of the biggest news outlets in Hungary. The complainant argued that the article is biased because it states that the reason of the epidemic is the lack of available vaccination, while the complainant thinks that it is in fact caused by the vaccination.The parties refused to mediate so the complaint was processed to the Complaints Council. The Council examined the article in terms of accuracy and bias so it examined some original sources, such as publications of the WHO and the National Epidemology Center. The council found that although two cases were officially caused by allergy to the vaccination, it is not fundamentally relevant information regarding the whole epidemic in a short news piece. The major reason of the epidemic by every official medical source is the lack of vaccination. The author quoted the relevant sources accurately and considering of the length of the piece of news, that was around 200 words only, there was no need, neither space to go in such details.The complaint was refused regarding biased reporting.Regarding accuracy, the statement cited by the complainant states that “infection is mostly symptomatic, but rarely causes serious paralysis. If the respiratory muscles are affected by the disease, persistent mechanical ventilation may be needed and death is also common. Due to the paralysis of the limbs, many people are forced into a walking machine.” The article cited that “the disease attacks the nervous system and causes paralysis within hours. Every two hundredth infection causes permanent paralysis.” The difference between the two wording is indeed substantial, but not gradual. “Every two hundredth infection causes persistent paralysis” is not included in the OEC’s announcement, but this is not the source of a short-term source - the data is simply found on the WHO side of the controlled source. (“One in 200 infections leads to irreversible paralysis.”). WHO adds: “Among those paralyzed, 5% to 10% die when their breathing muscles become immobilized.” The Index did not use the latter even more shocking indication of mortalities in its article. Two days later, he continued the story in another article, “Pandemic in Ukraine: Kárpátalja not in danger” (Kárpátalja being the region of Ukraine closest to Hungary and partly inhabited by ethnic Hungarians). It can not therefore be concluded that the Index would have exaggerated the risk of infection. Even if it is conceivable that epidemic information may be shocking to some readers, this is inevitable and in some cases even necessary. Based on the above, the Complaints Committee found that the Index did not violate the ethical guidelines in any of the points indicated by the complainant.CASE 3: COMPRESSION OR MANIPULATION?The complaint was filed against a regional daily in South East Hungary. The daily was not a member of the self-regulation platform at the time but the editor-in-chief accepted the jurisdiction of the Editors’ Forum.The article was about the state compensation of the clients of Questor, a recently failed financial securities company. The complainant claimed that the article is inaccurate, even false in several issues. The article draws a picture as if everything was alright with the compensation and protests of the clients around the country are ungrounded. The complainant stated that the article clearly favoures the government’s arguments, although the clients of the company are in fact not compensated or only at a symbolic extent. The complainant also claimed that the article fails to mention that a constituional review of the compensation law is underway.The Complaints Council has primarily examined whether the following sentence is inaccurate: “On 15 December 2015, the Parliament adopted a new law to settle the situation of Quaestor victims, which also changed the amount of compensation on the basis of the Constitutional Court’s earlier observations.”According to the council, the article does not mention that the Constitutional Court has commented on the amount of the payment but that the government has changed the amount of compensation, based on earlier observations of the Constitutional Court. While the wording of the article is not entirely accurate, this does not lead to a general and relevant level of inaccuracy.The complainant also objected to the article’s claim that the clients of the failed company were already compensated. The amounts they got, he claims, were only a fraction of what they are supposed to get. The Complaints Council found that although the title of the article says “Questor’s Clients Being Bailed Out”, later the article reveals that many clients they have talked to over the phone said that they are in fact not getting anything. The title does not cross the line between compression and manipulation. Compression is a technical necessity when it comes to titles and by that the title per definition interprets the facts somehow.CASE 4: IS A THREAT A THREAT?The complaint was filed against Index, a leading online news source. It objects the title of the article (“Lazar threatens Magyar Telekom”). The complainant claims that the title is exaggerating and is therefore manipulative.Considering the fact that the complaint is limited to the title and it does not elaborate the case further, the complaints council primarily examined the title, the context of the title and the consistency between it and article’s content.The requirement of honest reporting and staying away from manipulation also implies that the title of the article may not promise more than the actual facts of the news piece. The Complaints Council found that the title of the article is essentially in line with the content of it and, although it contains interpretations, it does not go beyond the limits of manipulation. The quotes in the article are accurate, and the title is a somewhat logical consequence of what was said at the press conference.The Council also considered the meaning of the word ‘threat’. In the dictionary it means “to envisage sb/sg punishment, scare sb/sg with retaliation”. In analyzing the report of János Lázár’s press conference, his sentences meet the official definition of ‘threat’. The first sentence following the title of the article is even more subtle: the words of the minister have been clarified here and been put in context accurately. The wording can be considered too hard, or even soft, cautious - depending on personal tastes or political attitudes. However, according to the Complaints Council the title is definitely not manipulative.CASE 5: FACTS OR OPINION?The complaint was filed against an article about the renovation of the Castle Bazaar in the heart of Budapest, published in Index again.“The author took over information from[weekly magazine] 168orawithout doublechecking, al though reading the referenced European Tenders Daily would have showed that public procurement discussed happened already months before the publication, so it was not newsworthy at all.”, the complainant claims. “The wording aims to wake suspicion”, he continues. The redflags.eu website describes itself as “Red Flags is an application that helps you find procurement documents that contain corruption risks based on various algorithms and indicators. It is only indication, not a proof that the given process is corrupt. It is rather a strong sign that you should pay attention to certain details. However, the appearance on the website itself does not yet justify the suspicion of corruption: it should have been backed by a journalist if he wrote that a violation of some rule was made. No such exploration was done.The complaint also claims, that the article’s choice of words is tendentious to draw a picture of a negligent and corrupt government.Finally, the complaint objects that in the article the total spendings of the project are 20 billion forints (cca 65 million EUR), although other media outlets have reported only around 7,5 billion forints (cca 24 million EUR).Mediation started between the complainant and Index, during which the parties did not reach an agreement. After that, the complaint was upheld by the Complaints Council in two of the six points at the first decree. Then both parties filed an appeal and at the end the board of the Editors’ Forum refused the complaint completely.The First decree decisionIn the opinion of the Complaints Council, it is of no ethical importance whether the news is new or not. Even if it had happened years ago, it might be news if the media just uncovered it. It could be an ethical offense could to publish old news like new, but it was not the case with this article. This complaint was refused. The complaint claimed that Index took over the news from the weekly magazine without double-checking and control. The council found that the article is only a summary and is not a result of independent research. Index acted in accordance with the rules of quotation and reference: it indicated and linked the original source, not simply copied, but summarized the text. The Commission found the complaint to be unfounded at this point, too. The complainant objected that Index called Red Flags page, that is the source of the original article, a corruption watchdog organization and thus implies corruption in the respective project, too. The Council decided that Index, applying the standard tools of journalism, described the organization precisely. The Committee also found this part of the complaint unfounded. The complainant also complained that some of the stylistic solutions and wording of the article suggest opinions, qualifications and false factual evidence. Here is a list of terms such as “shuffling”, “this is not the first such trick, they’ve added 400 million forints in the autumn ...” or “some parts of the Bazaar need to be renewed again.” In the Council’s view, some of these wording have a truly pejorative stylistic add-on, and, even if they do not explicitly comment, they clearly qualify as opinion. In the article the council found even more examples that the complainant listed. The Committee considers that the use of pejorative erms in such quantity and consistency questions the factuality of the article and strongly suggests that it is an incompetent, wasteful or corrupt investment decision. It is absolutely justified that a public investment of this magnitude and such spending of public funds are critically examined by the press and do not leave the official statements unquestioned. Careful scrutiny of facts cannot be replaced with style though. Using an expression with an emotional connotation does not cause disproportionate distortion, but the use of such expressions in a critical mass undermines balance. Therefore, the council upheld the complaint on this point. The complainant also complained that the Index mentioned 20 billion forints as a full cost of the investment in the Várkert Bazaar, while the original article estimates the renovation cost only to HUF 7.4 billion. Indeed, in its earlier articles, which were directly linked to the subject of the offense, the Index has shown in a transparent way what its 20 billion calculations cover and which clearly distinguishes the cost of developing a building complex and the development of the surrounding area. The council refused the complaint on this point. In its final point, the complaint claimed that the article did not give a voice to the representative of the company that is managing the project. The principle of balanced reporting is a very important ethical requirement. Although this article is only a summary of another one, in this special case it would have been appropriate, necessary and ethical to give the right to comment for the company involved since the article went beyond the original in some relevant angles. The council upheld the complaint at this point. Since both parties filed an appeal after the decision, it was processed to the Board as the second decree. The two appeals referred to points III, IV and VI. Point III remained untouched. However, the second decree changed the decision regarding points IV and VI.In the light of the foregoing, the Appellate Panel dismisses the appeal of the complainant and rescinds the part of the decision of the first instance which is appended to the appellant’s appeal.The Board examined whether the words used by the author with emotional connotations resulted in an inappropriate mixture of facts and opinions. The Board found that the wording is in line with the general style and wording of Index, and should not be regarded as opinion nor is it sufficient to be considered manipulative.Language of the press has been radically transformed in recent years, partly because of social media, and although certain wordings might difficult to decode or misleading for certain social groups, Index’s audience is accustomed to and familiar with such wording. However, their use can be critical in a mass which can already be regarded as manipulative, but in this case the Board believes that it remains within this limit. According to the Board, contrary to the decision on the first decree, facts and opinions did not mix up in an inappropriate way.Thus the Board upholds the appeal of Index. The Board has also overruled the first decree’s position regarding point VI of the decision. Although the company was not given the right to comment, it cannot be necessarily expected from a short summary. The committee overruled the arguments of the first decree council that Index repeatedly failed to ask the company other party in its several articles about the project. At a hearing held by the Board, the Editor-in-Chief of Index indicated that there were many opportunities for the company and the governmental body responsible to finance the construction, too speak on their behalf. The board also objected to examine the general practices of a media outlet beyond the actual case that the complaint is against to. Thus, the Board partially modified the first decree decision and rejected the complaint totally. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download