Practice of anonymous sources is quite normal around the world and journalists have right to hold their source’s name secret.
Ex-editor T.B on the other hand agrees with anonymous source only if information of the source is proven to be reliable. Her stance is that if information is vital the source will remain anonymous but must be prepared that in case if newspaper will go to court it will have to reveal itself:
The source may remain anonymous but he/she must provide facts to the journalist so that if tomorrow he is drawn to court he should have evidences.
Other editors were against anonymous sources. For example A.S. in her answer expressed deeply rooted antipathy towards conjunction “reliable source”:
You cannot use anonymous source, it must be revealed. They often write “according to information from reliable sources” something reliable something. From my personal experience I remember that I had people who did not submit any article till 5 or 6 o’clock and then suddenly he puts in front of me an article that some official did something, someone had a fight with someone I asked him, where he took that information from and he only replied that from a reliable source. That is why I do not accept anonymous “reliable” sources and do my best to not let them through in our newspaper.
Complete exclusion of anonymous sources from newspaper seems like a good strategy for many editors that try to preserve their newspapers from courts and fines. S.S.:
You cannot just write that an official is corrupt if you did not see it with your own eyes and rely only on some anonymous call. Tomorrow the counter side may bring you to court for slandering their dignity and honor and not only you but the entire newspaper. Anonymous will remain anonymous but you will have to keep the answer. That is why I firstly do not believe that journalist will show interest in such material.
Journalistic ethics constitutes an important part of the media freedom. Editors in this process play a pivotal role inextricably linking ethical norms and their application in the real life. Even though our female respondents did not specifically state that they follow ethical codes in their routine yet the dilemma situations show that majority of them comply with practices stipulated in the ethical code of the Press Council (see Appendix 2 for the Code of Ethics)
Reviewing the answers we also now can provide a comforting answer to the question that we put forward at the beginning of this subchapter – there are some difference between ethical approaches of female and male journalists in Azerbaijan. We already stipulated that Azerbaijani female editors are highly trained professionals with extensive experience that work predominantly in independent, semi-independent or government-funded but narrowly oriented newspapers and magazines.
Taking that into account it is possible to argue that the majority of them being exempted from politically instrumentilized fight for power allow themselves to make judgment according to ethical standards and universal practices. This feature they share with male editors of independent and semi-independent newspapers. When female editors run across ethical dilemma they rely predominantly on themselves consulting neither ethical codes nor colleagues as do, from time to time their male counterparts. Female editors use their experience and things that they have been taught when they just arrived to the profession. Another sharp distinction between men and women: from their interviews we can derive that female editors while making a decision are more ethically cautious and morally developed than their male counterparts.
Dostları ilə paylaş: |