Editorial

The physical attack on a number of journalists a few days ago is cause of concern. The outcome is even more worrying. This was not an isolated incident. From time to time members of the press have been victims of violence and their equipment damaged. Such unacceptable behaviour used to be the norm in the past, especially when partisan political events were being covered. That has changed, thankfully, but journalists continue to be easy targets.

Tolerance is a virtue. However, it is definitely misplaced when it accepts, as of little or no consequence, aggressive and violent behaviour. Unfortunately, in the recent assault on three pressmen covering a traffic accident, the perpetrators of such actions got away with a little more than a warning. This promotes a wrong concept of tolerance.

Tolerance is paid a lot of lip-service and one is usually quick to "defend" the freedom of the press. But that attitude more often than not changes completely when one starts to suspect one is at the receiving end of journalistic investigation.

That is not to say that there have not been instances where the media failed in their responsibility or where coverage of certain events led the public to jump into unsubstantiated conclusions. In this sense, society ought to continue supporting The Malta Press Club in its efforts to promote sound professional ethics. Likewise, society would be wise to insist that such ethics apply to all journalists.

For the observance and full enforcement of a code of ethics would guarantee that in fulfilling their duties journalists operate without fear or favour and place society first, before any personal or sectoral agendas. And that, in turn, would contribute to more acceptance of the role of the media and to society in general to tolerate journalists even when one is at the receiving end.

In this latest incident, family members of one of the traffic accident victims physically abused the journalists when they felt the press was intruding on their privacy. In other words, when they felt that members of the press were behaving unethically they took the law into their own hands.

Alas, the lenient reaction by the courts sends out the wrong signals and will certainly not discourage similar episodes from being repeated in the future. The general message is that such unsavoury attitude could be excusable if one loses one's head and then makes a public apology.

The role of journalists is very often unpleasant, difficult and dangerous. By the very nature of their job they are the watchdogs of society and have to act as its conscience. Despite their failings and shortcomings, they have a crucial role to play in presenting information and exposing unfairness and worse.

For too long our legal system has failed to make it clear that violence is unacceptable, especially when it is directed against people who, because of their responsibilities, have to administer discipline or make sure the rules are upheld. Teachers, pressmen, wardens and policemen are easy targets.

This should not be the case. People whose job places them at risk should be protected even more vigorously. Contrary to what some quarters would have us believe nowadays, punishment is a deterrent. One hopes this latest episode will serve as a catalyst for society to have a close hard look at the way justice is done or rather fails to be done.

If this issue is not recognised, if the problem is not addressed, it will be just the law of the jungle and the vital role of responsible journalism will be made all that much harder.