Reviews

Tony Harcup (2006) The Ethical Journalist

London: Sage. 224 pages. ISBN 9781412918978. £19.99 paperback.

According to Kelvin MacKenzie, editor of the Sun in the 1980s, 'ethics is a place to the east of London where men wear white socks.' Indeed, many mainstream journalists in Britain are extremely cynical about ethics. The reasons are obvious. The demands of the deadline and 'getting the story' dominate: ethical concerns are secondary, if they are ever considered at all.

Media operations are hierarchically organised with power to those (usually white men) at the top: those lower down the pecking order often see themselves as impotent (and largely dispensable) cogs in a much larger machine. Moreover, the media seem too committed to entrenched mythologies and work routines, too prone to crude sensationalising and stereotyping; too closely tied to dominant institutions and the rigours of surviving in a market-led economy.

Andrew Marr sums up the cynical view in My Trade: A Short History of British Journalism (2004) when he argues that the phrase 'responsible journalism' should be shunned: 'Responsible to whom? The state? Never. To "the people"? But which people, and of what views? To the readers? It is vanity to think you know them. Responsible, then to some general belief in truth and accuracy? Well that would be nice.'

Tony Harcup is not having any of this. Senior lecturer in journalism at the University of Sheffield, he is an outspoken campaigner for ethical journalism. Near the start of this lively, original and brave text he sets out his ethos:

'Whether we recognise it or not, ethics are involved in every story we follow up or ignore; every interview we request; every conversation with a confidential source; every quote we use, leave out or tidy up; every bit of context we squeeze in, simplify or exclude … For the ethical journalist, it is not enough to have a bulging contacts book or a good nose for news; being an ethical journalist also means asking questions about our own practice.'

According to Harcup Journalism matters because it lies at the heart of the democratic process and he acknowledges that journalism can often fail to live up to its self-proclaimed watchdog role, however he is at pains to stress:

'there are reporters out there every day doing their best to monitor the powerful and to ask the awkward questions. In the press galleries and corridors of our parliament buildings - as in many of our courts and council chambers - there are journalists taking notes and looking for stories.'

Harcup has little time for abstract theorising about ethics. Thus, there is no space here for Aristotle, Aquinas, Hume, Kant, Moore, Rawls, McIntyre and Co. Rather, he looks to a radical political tradition that incorporates figures such as John Milton, author of the celebrated plea for press freedom, Areopagitica, John Lilburne, leader of the radical Levellers whose writings aimed to 'undeceive the people', Tom Paine, whose journalism inspired both the American and French revolutions, and Martha Gellhorn who, after being praised for her coverage of the Vietnam war, said: 'All I did was report from the ground up, not the other way round.'

Harcup has written extensively on the alternative press. So in his chapter examining news values, it is not surprising he draws on this research to highlight the perspectives of journals such as the Liverpool Free Press (which saw news as 'useful information') and Leeds Other Paper (for whom a good story was one which 'reinforced the ability of the mass of the people to do things for themselves and decreased their reliance on others'). Other chapters explore journalists' relations with their sources, the reporting of crime and media regulation.

In 'Standing up for Standards', he looks at the ways in which journalists, individually or in groups, have promoted higher standards. For instance, in late 2003 and early 2004, journalists on the Express protested to the Press Complaints Commission over the pressures they faced from their proprietor to write anti-Gypsy stories. Elsewhere he celebrates George Seldes, who walked out on the Chicago Tribune in protest at the suppression of a story; and Kathy Weitz, who quit as features writer on the Sun in March 2003 because of its gung-ho coverage of the Iraq war. And he highlights the bravery of the Ukrainian journalists who took collective action against censorship before and during the 'Orange Revolution' of 2004.

Harcup draws on interviews with practising journalists as well as a vast array of other sources: for instance, all the major recent titles on media ethics (such as Allan, Atton, de Burgh, Franklin, Frost, Jempson, Petley, Lloyd, Pilger and Sanders) are acknowledged. If anything the text is over-densely referenced. Moreover, this is unashamedly a textbook - with each chapter ending with a 'further reading' section. The appendices carry a useful series of ethical codes and guidelines. But this is a short book: a future edition might consider referring simply to the websites for these codes and devote the saved forty pages to more important copy.

It's also very Anglo-centric, as Harcup acknowledges at the start. References to foreign journalists and controversies are dotted about the text. But given their urgency, it's strange that issues such as global warming, environmental pollution, and the coverage of US/UK militarism are largely ignored. Even references to basic issues such as objectivity/subjectivity, propaganda and professionalism are missing from the index.

Privacy is covered briefly but there is no reference to the impact of the Human Rights Act 1998 nor to the secret state and the growing links between Fleet Street journalists and the intelligence services. The Freedom of Information Act and citizen journalism receive only a passing mention; the implications of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act are ignored.

Even the Blair government's many anti-terror Acts have serious implications for the media, though they are ignored here. For instance, under the Terrorism Act 2000 it is an offence if a journalist finds out that someone has been funding terrorism and does not inform the police immediately. Journalists could also face five years in gaol if they have information that could secure the apprehension of someone involved in terrorism and they do not give it to the police 'as soon as reasonably practicable'.

The ethnic minority press is marginalised in Harcup's text while the internet as a source for journalistic research and the many ethical issues involved are downplayed.

These critical points should not detract from the overall success of the text: it should certainly help convince all students that ethics need not be boring but lie at the heart of the journalist's job.

Richard Keeble, University of Lincoln.