Transparency in the media

The International centre for media and public agenda have just published the results of a recent survey on the transparency of the media.

They looked at five areas----

Which outlets post corrections to their stories?

Which ones provide details about their owners and offer information about any other media and non-media holdings of those owners?

Which ones publish their internal guidelines for reporters (such as how potential conflicts of interest by reporters or editors are handled)?

Which ones publish their internal standards for stories (such as how anonymous sources are handled or how politicized language is identified)?

Which ones actively seek readers’ comments and complaints?

The survey covered 25 of the top news organisations and the greatest worries are:

"Only 11 out of the 25 news sites visibly post corrections to their stories, and again, it is the broadcast outlets that have a particularly poor track record. "

And

"Almost across the board the outlets are unwilling to make public their editorial and ethical guidelines. Many news outlets have internal documents that stipulate all kinds of standards for reporting and writing stories. Some are writing and editing concerns: how should reporters spell “Al Qaeda,” when can reporters use the term “terrorist,” and how many sources does it take to confirm a story? Other guidelines are in place to help reporters, editors, producers and others in the newsroom navigate their own behavior conflicts: can journalists be taken out to lunch, can they contribute to a political candidate, can they accept speakers’ fees?"