In a globalised world, you can get news, information and entertainment from anywhere in the world. More than that, it is at the tips of your fingers. The only thing you need to do is reach out for your smartphone. At home, you have a smart TV that provides you with more stuff than you can consume. So, should you care or just forget about Malta’s media system?
Some choose to do just that. More and more people are losing hope in the country, let alone in its media. If PBS censures the news about the pope’s and the president’s speeches, what will it do to other news?
If market driven journalists prefer stories that get clicks than stories that shake institutions, how can one be well-informed?
If hard-pressed newsrooms cut corners because of lack of resources, how can we get the full picture?
If whistleblowers are not well protected, how can we ever know of corrupt backroom dealings?
If the rich and the powerful threaten local journalists with court cases overseas that can ruin them financially, how will the international web of criminals and corrupt local politicians be revealed?
The answers to all the above questions make a big difference to you and your right to know.
The media – old and new media – should be the best tool at your disposal to function well as citizens. Without the flow of accurate, trustworthy and fairly presented information, your bloodline with society is interrupted.
Undoubtedly, there are tares (weeds) with the media wheat. No media reform can eliminate the tares. But a media reform worth its salt should create an environment that will nourish and sustain the media wheat helping it to supersede the media tares.
A media reform worth its salt should be a holistic one, including the legal, structural and socio-cultural dimensions.
During the past few months, Therese Comodini Cachia and I have researched several important building stones that construct a holistic media reform. The result is a 380-page book. A few of the important take-aways from this book are the following:
Public authorities are to be kicked into transitioning from a culture of secrecy and confidentiality to a culture of transparency and accountability. The Freedom of Information Act must ensure that access to information held by public authorities is the rule, hence public authorities have an obligation of disclosure.
The political dominance on the nomination of board members of PBS and the Broadcasting Authority should end.
Board members should be appointed in such a way that they represent people with expertise in the area and who hail from different sectors of society.
PBS should not be owned by the government but by a foundation, or some other legal structure, financed by a tax.
Press freedom must take its place as the fourth pillar of Malta’s democracy. To attain this, the constitution should recognise the right to freedom of expression for all, including the right to seek information, hold opinions, receive and impart information and ideas.
If whistleblowers are not well protected, how can we ever know of corrupt backroom dealings?- Fr Joe Borg
In safeguarding everyone’s freedom of expression, the constitution must recognise the value of journalism and its pre-eminent role as a public watchdog.
The Broadcasting Authority and the Malta Communications Authority should merge into a unified regulator. Both the regulator and the public service broadcaster should be legally, financially and administratively independent from the government.
The right to protection of journalistic sources must be recognised in the constitution, indicating very strict criteria for a justified interference.
The Protection of the Whistleblower Act needs to be adapted to provide opportunities for whistleblowers to impart information through structures they are able to trust. Furthermore, public disclosure should not be prevented through criteria which make it almost impossible to qualify for protection.
PBS should be constitutionally and legislatively bound to provide balanced and impartial coverage of political and industrial controversies and current public policy.
However, in a media environment strong on external pluralism it becomes questionable as to whether every radio and TV station also need to be constitutionally bound to do so.
Self-regulation is the best way forward for journalism. A code of ethics well managed by a respected Press Complaints Commission is one of the best ways to make self-regulation effective. Regulatory or licencing bodies for journalists should be resisted.
In the digital media landscape, with its vastness, immediacy and omnipresence, a media educated audience may very well turn out to be the best, if not the only effective, way both of holding journalism accountable to its code of ethics and of defending journalism from the intervention of the state or the possible impositions of big business.
Two of the basic assumptions of the book are that journalism is democracy’s survival tool and that journalism is at the service of audiences. Only a strong legal, structural and socio-cultural enabling environment can bring about quality journalism.
Without quality journalism, audiences will not be informed in a truthful and critical way about those whom they entrust with the management of the state.
Without quality journalism, audiences cannot fulfil adequately and effectively their role as citizens. This means that whatever benefits journalism, benefits audiences.
The launch of the book will be held tomorrow at 6.30pm at the foyer of the Times of Malta building in Mrieħel. The public is invited.