 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.81.109.100
In Reply to: RE: So, you're utterly unable to explain your belief that discounts cause corruption posted by Rob Doorack on May 24, 2009 at 15:20:35
SPJ (Society of professional journalists) Code of Ethics says. Journalists who act independently should:
— Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.
— Remain free of associations and activities that may compromise integrity or damage credibility.
— Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.
— Disclose unavoidable conflicts.
— Be vigilant and courageous about holding those with power accountable.
— Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence news coverage.
— Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; avoid bidding for news.
Either this code of ethics should apply to reviewers as part of the journalism profession OR audio reviewers are not journalists and only a marketing expense for manufacturers, importers and distributors.
Follow Ups:
The SPJ is an American body. Hi-Fi+ is a UK magazine. So the SPJ's code of conduct does not apply here. We are tied to a minimum standard; the strictures laid down by the Press Complaints Commission. The PCC's Code of Conduct makes no mention about professional associations, free travel and gifts. As few magazine editors and journalists in the UK belong to a trade body or organisation, the PCC's Code of Conduct - and any in-house strictures from a publishing house - are the overarching guidelines used in the UK media.
However, I am also bound by the Code of Conduct instigated by the Chartered Institute of Journalists, which lays down stronger guidelines on this matter. I am not going to reprint the entire document for brevity, but the salient points in that code are as follows:
- You will behave in a transparent way. This will include declaring your professional status in any publication in which you operate. You are not required to maintain the same professional name, but must seek not to practise deception on the reader or viewer at any time.
- You will not request or accept payment for the publication of editorial matter under whatever guise, including costs relating to colour separation of pictures or other devices, which compromise your editorial independence.
- You will not accept money, or any other inducement whatsoever, to manipulate editorial comment unless it is clearly identified.
My contributors (and the previous editor) are not necessarily members of the same governing body, so not have been subject to the same strictures in the past. I have already introduced a greater degree of transparency in disclosing interests and I will be instigating stronger integrity guidelines under my tenure, but putting these guidelines in place will take time.
Editor, Hi-Fi Plus magazine, from sunny ol' Englandshire
> — Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived.>
Even perceived by conspiracy theorists with no real reason or logic?
> — Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and shun secondary employment, political involvement, public office and service in community organizations if they compromise journalistic integrity.>
Taking a discount available to the entire industry, including review journalists who may have reveiwed the product negatively or not at all, does not compromise anyone's integrity.
If you believe it does, please explain how.
Otherwise I would question the ethics and conduct of one who makes blanket accusations without evidence or cause.
May I remind you of the letter YOU sent to playback magazine regarding the very independence of reviewers...
"How can we trust that you'll keep your editorial content independent from advertising considerations when you founding partners' products will be reviewed in your publication?"
Perhaps YOU could question your OWN ethics, or perhaps YOU had sufficient concern to write Playback magazine. In either cases, I suggest your conduct might not be as high as you think it is...
(nt)
Post a Followup:
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
