Our Watch – the organisation working to prevent violence against women – invited me to be a panellist in a webinar focussed on the legal restrictions journalists face when reporting upon domestic and family violence (24/2/25).
The webinar, hosted by Our Watch and the RMIT Centre for Innovative Justice, featured two parts, with the first exploring the impacts of legal narratives and court processes on media reporting of violence against women.
My contribution was in part 2, which offered an introduction to the key legal and ethical topics confronting Australian journalists and strategic communicators and offering a suite of reflective techniques for navigating them.
Our part was hosted by Our Watch media implementation lead Rebekah Hayden and moderated by Elena Campbell, Associate Director – Research, Advocacy and Policy Centre for Innovative Justice, RMIT University.
Senior counsel at News Corp, Gina McWilliams, spoke first in our part, outlining the key legal considerations journalists need to consider when reporting upon violence against women – particularly matters that might be before the courts. She covered the main areas of defamation, contempt of court, identification restrictions and suppression orders.
My contribution focused on the interplay between defamation and contempt in the crucial sub judice period of a legal matter before moving into a range of reflective techniques reporters might use before publishing such a story, including mindful reflection, journalling, mindmapping, meeting with colleagues and seeking legal advice.
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am a retired academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
My keynote address last week to the international research conference at the University of Colombo, Sri Lanka, introduced strategies for enabling students and colleagues to reflect mindfully in the course of their communication and education.
—
The edited shorter address follows. The full version is available from the organisers (udari@spc.cmb.ac.lk ) and will be published in the conference proceedings later this year.
—
Thank you for the honour of delivering this keynote address. I thank and acknowledge the conference organisers, chair, university officials, invited dignatories, delegates and students.
I wish to acknowledge the traditional owners of this land where I have written and delivered this address – the Kombumerri people of the Yugambeh language group of indigenous peoples in Australia – and to their elders past, present and emerging.
I also acknowledge the communication, ethical and legal codes and practices they developed over tens of thousands of years, and to the cultural rules underpinning human communication in all communities internationally, including in Sri Lanka.
This paper introduces some strategies for enabling students and colleagues to reflect mindfully when engaging in their communication and education. In doing so it attempts to lay some foundation stones for proposing such strategies – offering the intellectual narrative of their conception and development.
Over the past decade I have been exploring the possibilities for mindful reflection in journalism – a concept I first raised in my UNESCO World Press Freedom Address in Auckland in 2013. That – and a follow-up article on mindful journalism in an academic journal led to an approach by the pioneer of this field, the late Professor Shelton Gunaratne to join him and our colleague Dr Sugath Senarath in the editing and authorship of the book Mindful Journalism in 2015, where we expounded upon how the various steps of Buddhism’s Noble Eightfold Path could underpin a more mindful approach to news gathering, selection and reporting. In the nine years since its publication I have attempted to develop strategies for applying mindfulness strategies in journalism, communication and legal education – to help students and colleagues forge solutions to ethical dilemmas that might constitute a genuine ‘middle way’. I thank Dr Senarath and the organising committee for inviting me here today to discuss some of those practical tools for use in the communication and education contexts.
As my new book explains, professional communicators and educators can draw upon a range of reflective tools including variations of mindfulness-based meditation techniques expounded by the Buddha 2500 years ago to help them take a considered and purposive approach to ethical and legal decision-making.
Buddhism does not have an historical monopoly on the art of reflection. Socrates described self-examination as central to a virtuous life. The English philosopher John Locke (1632–1704) summed up the practice we now know as ‘metacognition’ (Tarricone, 2011) – being consciously aware of one’s own thinking and doing.
This is similar to the secular approach developed three centuries later by educationalist Donald Schön, whose research aimed to equip professionals with the ability to make crucial decisions in the midst of practice, which he called ‘reflection-in-action’ .
The application of MBM to morality and by extension to professional ethics echoes the step of ‘Right Conduct’ in the Noble Eightfold Path – samma kammanto – which involves ‘a call to understand one’s behaviour more objectively before trying to improve it’ and ‘to reflect on actions with an eye to the motives that prompted them’ (Smith and Novak, 2003: 43).
Communicators and educators need to ‘reflect-in-action’ upon ethical dilemmas as they arise in the midst of their work (Schön, 1987: 26).
The lack of reflection can lead to unnecessary harm to others. Unethical behaviour can exacerbate the trauma that victims have already encountered in shocking news events. Unlawful practice can bring reputational or financial damage to others and awards of damages or even jail terms for the offending communicators (Pearson, 2024, p.50).
Another crucial reason why it is important to engage in some method of careful reflection before making an ethical or legal decision is the mental health of the communication professionals and educators themselves.
In my recent book I stress the importance of students identifying their own unique ‘moral compass’ – their sense of right and wrong behaviour that can stem from a combination of a host of factors including one’s upbringing, religion, and values along with their professional ethical codes (Pearson, 2024, p.16).
As an exercise, I ask students to sit for a few moments to reflect upon influences upon their own moral decision-making and then draw their unique moral compasses, attributing the four main points on the compass to the four prime influences on their moral decisions, with the lesser points representing other factors.
I suggest this is a worthwhile exercise for all of us – teachers, students and practitioners.
Interconnections between MBM and mental health
Psychological studies of trauma have uncovered the notion of ‘moral injury’ – where individuals feel they have compromised their moral compasses through their unethical behaviour and blame themselves for the harm that has resulted when the professional expectations of an employee was at odds with that individual’s moral principles.
So students need a toolkit of techniques for inward reflection they can use to assess their thought processes, emotional states, workplace situations, learning and, most importantly, their ethical and legal decision-making (Pearson, 2024, p. 60).
The answer to pausing to identify the ‘red flags’ that might represent an ethical or legal dilemma lies in a developing a routine system of reflection. These might be situations or emotions, identifiable via mindful reflection.
Obviously, the key here is being able to identify a problematic emotion or situation, red flag it, then pause to weigh an appropriate ethical and legal course of action.
The approach calls upon students and communicators to pause to adopt the elements of the Eightfold Path into these eight steps of mindful reflection:
Stage of reflection
Explanation
How might I improve this communication to minimise risk? [Wise Speech – Samma vaca ]
Reconsider your words in any communication you are undertaking and refine and edit them to conform with legal requirements.
We put this into practice in the classroom in a pilot research project (Pearson, 2023) where mindfulness-based reflections were offered regularly during a media law course, with a strong emphasis upon emotional and situational analysis of media law dilemmas .
There were a variety of responses from 90 students to the mindfulness reflection experience. Some saw it as invaluable for their learning, lives and careers.
They said they were “reviewing in more depth”, “raising a mental flag on sections which were still unclear”, giving “a moment to understand the course better”, “consolidate learning”, helping “info to sink in”, and “consolidating the information” (Pearson, 2023).
Numerous respondents highlighted the mental health benefits of the practice.
Some students commented on the pause to reflect function and its benefits:
It made me realise that many times before making a decision or judgement, did I not stop to think or consider my actions.
Another said it trained them to “step back and assess an area, or myself, before venturing into a position, or stance or opinion”. This was metacognition in evidence (Flavell 1976; Tarricone 2011) – thinking about their own thinking – and ‘reflection-in-action’ actually happening (Schön 1987).
Such accounts offer encouragement to those incorporating pause and reflect exercises in their textbooks (Baker 2020; Pearson 2024). They give hope that some instruction in this might assist students to actually execute those strategies when encountering occupational dilemmas after graduation.
In this summary of my full paper – available from the organisers – we have journeyed through definitions of mindfulness in its modern educational context having established its roots in Buddhism and philosophy. We have learned how we might map our own moral compasses. We have looked at the relationship between MBM and mental health, and its potential for offering resilience to post-traumatic stress for journalists reporting tragic and gruesome stories. We have outlined MBM as a tool for ethical decision making. And we have reviewed a recent pilot project where students reported the pros and cons of engaging in MBM in the media law curriculum. Much is still to be explored in the application of this two millennia-old practice to tertiary education and communication and educational practice. I hope some of you are interested enough to undertake research to shed further light on this enlightening path with so many potential benefits.
References
Baker, S (2020) ‘The Ethics of Advocacy: Moral Reasoning in the Practice of Public Relations’, in Wilkins L and Christians CG (eds) The Routledge Handbook of Mass Media Ethics, 2nd edition, Taylor and Francis, NY.https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315545929
Bok, S. 1978, Lying:Moral Choice in Public and Private Life, Pantheon Books, New York.
Drumwright, M. and Murphy, P. 2013, ‘How advertising practitioners view ethics: Moral muteness, moral myopia, and moral imagination’, Journal of Advertising, 33 (2), 7– 24.
Feinstein, A. and Storm, H. 2017, The Emotional Toll on Journalists Covering The Refugee Crisis, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Oxford.
Germer CK, Siegel RD and Fulton PR (2005) Mindfulness and Psychotherapy, New York: Guilford Press.
Gunaratne, Shelton A., Mark Pearson and Sugath Senarath, (2015). Mindful Journalism and News Ethics in the Digital Era – A Buddhist Approach. Routledge, NY.
Gunaratne, S. A. (2005) The Dao of the press: A humanocentric theory, Cresskill, NJ, Hampton
Gunaratne, S. A. (2007) Let many journalisms bloom: Cosmology, Orientalism and freedom, China Media Research, Vol. 3, No. 4 pp 60-73
Gunaratne, S. A. (2009) A Buddhist view of journalism: Emphasis on mutual causality, Javnost: The Public, Vol. 16, No. 2 pp 61-75
Litz, B. T., Stein, N., Delaney, E., Lebowitz, L., Nash, W. P., Silva, C., & Maguen, S. 2009, ‘Moral injury and moral repair in war veterans: A preliminary model and intervention strategy’, Clinical Psychology Review, 29(8), 695–706. <https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2009.07.003>
Locke, J. 1959, An Essay Concerning Human Understanding, Dover Publications, NY.
Pearson, M. (2024). The Communicator’s Guide to Media Law and Ethics – A Handbook for Australian Professionals. Routledge, London and New York.
Pearson, M. (2023). Student perceptions of mindful reflection as a media law teaching tool. Australian Journalism Review. 45 (2) pp. 197–211.
Pearson, M., McMahon, C., O’Donovan, A., & O’Shannessy, D. (2021). Building journalists’ resilience through mindfulness strategies. Journalism, 22(7), 1647-1664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919833253
Pearson, M., McMahon, C., and O’Donovan, A. (2018) ‘Potential benefits of teaching mindfulness to journalism students’. Asia Pacific Media Educator (December). 28:2: https://doi.org/10.1177/1326365X18800080
Pearson, M. (2014). Towards ‘mindful journalism’: Applying Buddhism’s Eightfold Path as an ethical framework for modern journalism, Ethical Space 11 (4): 38 – 46.
Riskin, LL and Wohl, RA (2015). ‘Mindfulness in the Heat of Conflict: Taking STOCK’ Harvard Negotiation Law Review, 20. https://ssrn.com/abstract=2754646
Schön, D. 1987, Educating the Reflective Practitioner: Toward a New Design for Teaching and Learning the Professions, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Shay J. 2014. ‘Moral injury’. Psychoanalytic Psychology, 31(2), 182–191.
Smith, H. and Novak, P. (2003) Buddhism: A concise introduction, New York, Harper San Francisco
Tarricone P (2011) The Taxonomy of Metacognition. Psychology Press, East Sussex.
Trammel RC (2015) ‘Mindfulness as Enhancing Ethical Decision-Making and the Christian Integration of Mindful Practice’, Social Work and Christianity 42(2): 165–177.
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
I had the honour of delivering an online plenary address on mindful communication last week to a seminar organised by the Bhawanipur Education Society College in Kolkata, India.
The seminar’s coverage in Edugraph
The topic was ‘Applying Buddhist principles to communication law and ethics: a mindful approach’.
The paper linked key principles from Buddhism’s Noble Eightfold Path to best practice in communication law and ethics.
It explained how a mindful and reflective approach to the ethical and legal consequences of professional communication can strengthen the credibility of communication and journalism and serve to minimise suffering and karmic consequences – both for the practitioner and the audience.
Special attention was paid to the practical and secular application of the key Buddhist principles of wise intent, wise speech, wise action and wise mindfulness in the professional communication process. Techniques for reflection in the midst of busy communication workplaces – including brief mindful reflections, journalling and mindmapping – were flagged and considered.
I drew upon my authored and co-authored books and research articles to offer illustrative examples of the application of such tools to legal and ethical problems including defamation, invasion of privacy, and breach of confidentiality.
Different religious approaches to truthfulness and honesty were also considered.
The starting point for students to identify their own ‘moral compass’ – the key biographical influences that inform their own system of morality – was explained.
Also crucial is the ability to recognise the point at which an ethical or legal dilemma is arising and then to pause to reflect upon its implications and a suitable course of action.
The elements of Buddhism’s Noble Eightfold Path offer a starting point for this analysis because they are straightforward principles that can be distilled from most religions and philosophies but can be presented in a simple list form to offer a moral lens through which the professional ethical rules and the media laws of society can be assessed.
For some of my related research, please see:
Pearson, M. (2024). Chapter 3: Tools for reflection in a communication context. In Pearson, M. (2024). The Communicator’s Guide to Media Law and Ethics – A Handbook for Australian Professionals (Routledge, London and NY). Pp. 49-76. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003372752-4
Gunaratne, S.A; Pearson, M. and Senarath, S. (eds) (2015). Mindful Journalism and News Ethics in the Digital Era: A Buddhist Approach (Routledge, NY). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315723341
Morton, T. and Pearson, M. (2015), Zones of silence: Forensic patients, radio documentary, and a mindful approach to journalism ethics. Pacific Journalism Review. 21 (2): 11-32. https://doi.org/10.24135/pjr.v21i2.113
Pearson, M. (2015). Enlightening communication analysis in Asia-Pacific: Media studies, ethics and law using a Buddhist perspective. International Communication Gazette, 77 (5): 456-470. https://doi.org/10.1177/1748048515586945
Pearson, M. (2019). “Spirituality in Journalism”, in Bernadette Flanagan and Lazlo Zsolnai (eds) (2019) The Routledge International Handbook of Spirituality and Society, Routledge, London. pp. 419-426 [ISBN 9781138214675 ] https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315445489
Pearson, M., McMahon, C., O’Donovan, A., & O’Shannessy, D. (2021). Building journalists’ resilience through mindfulness strategies. Journalism, 22(7), 1647–1664. https://doi.org/10.1177/1464884919833253
Pearson, M. (2023). Student perceptions of mindful reflection as a media law teaching tool. Australian Journalism Review. 45 (2) pp. 197–211. https://doi.org/10.1386/ajr_00132_1
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
A former ombudsman who sued a major newspaper for defamation offers his insights into the experience in Episode #009 of our occasional Griffith University SMALL podcast – Social Media and Law Livestream.
Griffith University Media Law students Emily Soccol and Anna Swann interview Professor John McMillan AO about his successful defamation action against the Canberra Times in 2016.
Mr McMillan has held positions of Commonwealth Ombudsman, Integrity Commissioner for the Australian Commission for Law Enforcement Integrity, Australian Information Commissioner, NSW Ombudsman and a member of the Australian Copyright Tribunal.
He is also a legal consultant and an Emeritus Professor at the Australian National University. Drawing on his expertise over a five decade career, Professor McMillan offers his perspective on defamation laws and the legal risks associated with publishing damaging material.
If you are a communication professional wanting to study in this area, please consider enrolling in our online courses Social Media Law and Risk Management (postgraduate, fully online) or Media Law (undergraduate, available online or on campus).
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
A forthcoming book on changes to investigative journalism across three key liberal democracies features a chapter I have written on the new Australian public interest defence to defamation.
The book offers new insights into the crucial role of investigative journalism at a pivotal time of technological changes and upheavals.
It surveys innovations and unexpected impacts of the field, from past and present challenges, and what may be in store for the future of the industry.
It is due for publication by Routledge on December 30, 2022.
As explained in its cover notes, the book starts by exploring the increasingly investigative innovations in political and independent reporting, along with a comparison of the rhetoric and reality of a so-called “golden era” of investigative journalism in the past and the present.
The book proceeds to analyse the growth of creative and sports investigative reporting, as well as the ability of contemporary conflict journalism to overcome surmounting challenges.
It also examines the capacity of groundbreaking investigations, including data reporting, to expose injustices involving women, indigenous communities and other minorities.
It features interviews with key industry and research professionals, presenting the reactions of four media experts to the crises faced by investigative journalism in a digital environment of escalating disinformation, legal restrictions and popular interest in the news.
The book concludes by reflecting on previous and current challenges and offers insights into the prospect for investigative journalism of the future.
Presenting unique views on the diversity, resilience and transformative power of investigative journalism, this book will be a valuable resource to students and scholars of journalism, communication, media and politics, as well as professionals already operating within the field of journalism.
My chapter examines the fourth estate principle of the ‘public interest’ as informing important reforms to defamation law in Australia.
It offers an historical and international context to the law around investigative and public interest journalism and tracks some of the financial and legal hurdles investigative journalists and their publishers face when defending defamatory material in their reports.
Shortcomings of the key defences to defamation are highlighted with case examples.
It then details an important recent defamation law reform in Australia – the introduction of a new ‘public interest’ defence modelled on a 2013 UK predecessor – and considers the extent to which it might benefit the enterprise of investigative journalism using historical and international comparisons.
The chapter concludes by speculating how the new defence might have applied hypothetically to a current high-profile trial as a means of examining its potential utility for public interest journalism.
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
Decades of experience as a magistrate and lawyer inform the advice offered to court reporters in Episode #008 of our occasional Griffith University SMALL podcast – Social Media and Law Livestream.
Retired magistrate Antoine Bloemen. Photo: Anne Bloemen.
Griffith University Media Law student Elizabeth Heseltine interviews retired Western Australian magistrate Antoine Bloemen about the traps faced by novice court reporters, with some fascinating examples.
He draws upon his 40 years of expertise as a legal professional to share his insights into courtroom etiquette and the potential legal ramifications of a poorly researched and written article [Listen here: 14:26 min].
If you are a communication professional wanting to study in this area, please consider enrolling in our online courses Social Media Law and Risk Management (postgraduate, fully online) or Media Law (undergraduate, available online or on campus).
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
Episode #007 of our occasional Griffith University SMALL podcast – Social Media and Law Livestream – looks at Freedom of Information processes from a different perspective – that of a lawyer managing the Commonwealth Government’s FOI approvals and exemptions.
Griffith University Media Law student Mia Durnan interviews Senior Lawyer Rodney Durnan about Freedom of Information laws (FOI); covering basic topics like ‘what is FOI?’, the process of an application, some of the exemptions that can apply and how the FOI laws interact with privacy laws from a practical perspective.
Mr Durnan is part of In-House Counsel for a large Federal Government agency.
With more than 15 years of experience, he and his team specialise in administrative law which includes Freedom of Information and Privacy. [15:25 min] Find Mia’s interview here.
If you are a communication professional wanting to study in this area, please consider enrolling in our online courses Social Media Law and Risk Management (postgraduate, fully online) or Media Law (undergraduate, available online or on campus).
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
In episode #006of our occasional SMALL podcast – Social Media and Law Livestream – I speak with academic whistleblowing expert Professor A J Brown.
Professor Brown is leader of the Centre for Governance and Public Policy’s public integrity and anti-corruption research program in Griffith University’s School of Government and International Relations.
He is on the global board of the world anti-corruption organisation Transparency International and a leading expert on public interest whistleblowing. He talks about the legal framework for whistleblowers and the implications for journalists and their confidential sources. Find our interview here [21:49min].
If you are a communication professional wanting to study in this area, please consider enrolling in our online courses Social Media Law and Risk Management (postgraduate, fully online) or Media Law (undergraduate, available online or on campus).
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
Episode #005 of our occasional SMALL podcast – Social Media and Law Livestream – features Guardian Australia political reporter Amy Remeikis talking media law with tutor Susan Grantham.
From court and police rounds, to reporting on Australian federal politicians, Amy (pictured below) discusses how she navigates legal risks while reporting in a wired world.
This latest episode [22:11 mins] – published on The Source News – canvasses Amy’s views on recent defamation cases including the High Court judgment against media outlets’ hosted social media comments in the Dylan Voller case. Enjoy!
If you are a communication professional wanting to study in this area, please consider enrolling in our online courses Social Media Law and Risk Management (postgraduate, fully online) or Media Law (undergraduate, available online or on campus).
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
The long awaited Handbook of Global Media Ethics, edited by the internationally lauded Professor Stephen Ward, has now been published and includes my chapter on global justice, factual reporting and advocacy journalism.
My chapter argues global justice can be a legitimate ethical objective of journalism, requiring factuality as a platform, achievable in some situations through advocacy journalism.
It explores definitional boundaries and ethical dimensions of the three terms ‘global justice’, ‘factual reporting’ and ‘advocacy journalism’.
It compares and contrasts legal and jurisprudential notions of global justice from its meanings to international journalism, offering examples of some works of investigation and reportage that might pursue global justice goals but which have been contested in the courts over their factuality or partisanship.
It explains that while judicial cases are only one approach to the analysis of underlying ethical issues, their systematic approach based on laws and precedents offers some useful insights.
The chapter explains that some works of advocacy journalism might fall outside the law, or broadly accepted journalism ethical guidelines, but perhaps still encourage ‘ethical flourishing’.
Indeed, as Ward argues, some stories require journalists to “adopt the perspective of global justice and to consider what is best for the global community”.
The chapter explores the notion of ‘factual reporting’, distinguishing it from false news and from a legal standard of factuality, and introduces a taxonomy of factuality in ethical reporting, which includes a spectrum of fact sourcing, selection, verification, inclusion, exclusion, ordering, ramifications and revisiting. It examines the dimensions of ‘advocacy journalism’ and exemplifies how the notions of factuality and advocacy are not mutually exclusive.
It links this with the mindful exploration of intent and livelihood suggested in the foundational principles of ‘mindful journalism’.
I explain there:
Purposive reflection on one’s intent – and one’s livelihood – is examined in the relatively new area of ‘mindful journalism’, where Buddhist ethics and phenomenology are applied to journalism. Such structured meditation on these considerations – sitting to reflect upon the intent of a work of journalism, taking into account the implications for a range of stakeholders, along with a mental review of where the particular assignment and techniques sit with one’s livelihood – together form three of the eight steps involved in the mindful journalism approach.
The chapter offers an approach for reporters and editors to examine carefully the motivational roots (‘intent’) of a work of journalism to identify the source of any advocacy and its purpose, and to reflect upon how this sits with their professional identity and values.
It suggests all journalism is by some definitions ‘advocacy journalism’, but that not all advocacy journalism meets aspirational standards of global justice or factuality.
If the mindful journalism approach is adopted, then the journalist’s perception of their livelihood and its professional ethical framework is crucial to the examination of intent and to the decision over the ethics of a particular course of action. The protagonist must decide whether they are first and foremost a journalist or an advocate. Central questions include: Are you a journalist using a factual base to advocate for a human right? Or, alternatively, are you an advocate using some journalistic techniques to advocate for a human right? This self-identification with a particular occupation or profession invokes a particular ethical framework to the investigation and publishing enterprise. If the self-perception of livelihood is that of a journalist, then the protagonist should abide by a journalistic ethical code such as the MEAA or SPJ code. If, however, the methods are journalistic but the protagonist identifies as an advocate, then other ethical frameworks might be invoked, such as professional ethics of activist organisations (such as Greenpeace), governing bodies (like the UNHRC) or a public relations association like the PRIA.
The mindful examination of intent must begin with the acceptance that all journalism has elements of advocacy journalism, but that it can be alleviated by disclosing agendas and allegiances and being transparent about funding and influences. Such an approach can assist the ethical journalist in carefully navigating the fault lines of global justice, factual reporting and advocacy journalism.
The chapter includes examples of international works of journalism involving advocacy for global justice, premised upon factual reporting, which navigate the ethical fault lines inherent in the hybrid term ‘advocacy journalism’.
Disclaimer: While I write about media law and ethics, nothing here should be construed as legal advice. I am an academic, not a lawyer. My only advice is that you consult a lawyer before taking any legal risks.
Investigative Journalism in Changing Times
Griffith University Media Law student Mia Durnan interviews Senior Lawyer Rodney Durnan about Freedom of Information laws (FOI); covering basic topics like ‘what is FOI?’, the process of an application, some of the exemptions that can apply and how the FOI laws interact with privacy laws from a practical perspective.
Professor Brown is leader of the Centre for Governance and Public Policy’s public integrity and anti-corruption research program in Griffith University’s School of Government and International Relations.
journlaw 