Adapting Journalism Ethics to Contemporary Challenges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The evolution of journalism practice has accelerated the reorganization of self-regulation bodies, the renewal of ethical standards (Puertas & Vural, 2023) and led to the creation of (e.g. in France in 2019). Our study examines (1) the adaptation of self-regulatory bodies to the changing landscape of journalism and society; (2) the interconnectedness between these transformations and shifts in professional identities; and (3) the similarities and differences among press councils in French-speaking Belgium, Switzerland, Quebec, and France. Our theoretical framework draws from journalism ethics, metajournalistic discourse and professional identities. Additionally, we incorporate a comparative dimension rooted in literature on journalistic cultures and media systems (Hallin & Mancini, 2004; Hanitzsch et al., 2019). We adopt the three-level ethical analysis (Cornu, 2009, pp.117-118) to articulate descriptive, normative and reflective ethics. This framework facilitates reflection on journalistic values as truth, balance, accuracy (Elliot, 2020), objectivity, immediacy and public service (Deuze, 2005). Ethical values and norms help journalists identify as members of a community (Hanitzsch & Örnebring, 2019, p. 105), legitimize their actions and assert their respectability (Grevisse, 2016; Singer, 2015). Self-regulation shapes the professional identity of journalists (Ruellan, 2011, p. 25) and serves not only to set boundaries (Carlson, 2016; Singer, 2015) but also as a mechanism for the profession to defend itself against criticism (Deuze, 2005). Our research, mixing abductive and inductive methods (Reichertz, 2013), involves: (1) thematic analysis of ethical norms within each press council; (2) an analysis of the structures of each council; (3) semi-structured interviews with members of self-regulation bodies members. We conduct these phases biennially to track changes. The literature in Journalism Studies explores individual journalist ethics, future challenges for media councils (Harder, 2021) and ethical codes (Lauk, 2021). Our study aims to bridge all these dimensions by analyzing the evolutions of journalism ethics and professional identities within the perspective of press councils. Additionally, we adopt a comparative approach, conducting an in-depth analysis of press councils in four French-speaking countries. Our data collection has concluded. We have analyzed one-third of our text sample and initiated the first wave of semi-structured interviews with press council members. Initial findings suggest that press councils are broadening ethical standards to encompass social media, indicating a shift in journalistic identity towards prioritizing communicative intent over formal professional status (Rotili, 2022). Norms about scientific journalism in France and media coverage of violence against women in French-speaking Belgium illustrate an expansion of social responsibility boundaries for journalists, echoing Singer's (2015) argument regarding the adaptation of journalistic values to digitalization.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".