(Ian Mayes, ombudsman for The Guardian in London, is 2005-2006 president of the Organization of News Ombudsmen.)
By Ian Mayes
The Guardian
The Guardian
I spent some time recently in Madrid at a conference on self-regulation in news organisations, convened by the Federation of Press Associations of Spain (FAPE). Its main purpose was to launch the country’s first nationwide ethical code for newspapers, to listen to practical advice from a panel of members of the Press Complaints Commission of the United Kingdom, and to consider other forms of self-regulation including that of ombudsman.
Some form of self-regulation is considered necessary in more and more countries, and by an increasing number of individual newspapers, radio or television networks, partly in response to the altered environment in which the news media work. The development of email, in particular, has created the expectation of quick and easy access and response, with lobbies sometimes seeking to apply pressure through weight of numbers, and sometimes urging haste where calm reflection is required.
Spain now not only has an ethical code. It has news ombudsmen on three leading newspapers, El País, La Vanguardia and La Voz de Galicia – something of a challenge to Britain, where the ombudsman is a peculiarity.
An ombudsman works independently within news organisations at the interface between readers, listeners and viewers on one side, and journalists and editors on the other. It is the only kind of self-regulation that can have the effect of building trust between a specific news organisation and its readership or audience. It does that through the systematic and impartial handling of complaints, and the open discussion of issues raised by readers. It offers a real chance to build a new, stronger relationship between journalist and reader.
You appoint an ombudsman because you want your news organisation to be a self-correcting one with a dedication to getting it right and no interest in getting it wrong. As colleagues in the United States have expressed it, you want to feed into the arena of public debate accurate information upon which the citizen can rely when he or she is forming an opinion on the affairs of the day.
The first step along this road is, I suggest, a very simple one – one that may work better if accompanied by an ombudsman but which does not absolutely need one. It is the voluntary and systematic publication of corrections: an easy matter for newspapers and now made easier for broadcasters through the advent of related websites. One only has to look at the way in which the BBC is using its website for this purpose.
Why has it been so difficult for news organisations to take this step? To quote a Spanish proverb – he is always right who suspects that he is always making mistakes. I can only suppose it is because of the strength of the cultural fallacy – and the strength with which, historically, it has gripped journalism – that the frank admission of error somehow undermines authority. There is no evidence for that and some evidence to the contrary.
What I believe does undermine trust among readers, listeners or viewers is not the admission of error – even when the error is of an extremely serious nature – but the discovery or revelation or forced admission of a significant error that has gone uncorrected. An honest piece of advice to readers might be: never trust a newspaper which never appears to get anything wrong, and treat the others with the degree of scepticism your experience advises. Every journalist who has ever worked in newspapers knows that the portrait is incomplete and misleading without the warts.
The same goes for radio and television news. It is a product of the way we work.
The desire to enhance trust through self-regulation can be very strong in countries with a difficult or complex political inheritance. This desire often accompanies the primary motive – that of protecting the news media from government intervention. The institution of ombudsman is perfectly compatible with that of a nationwide or industry body such as the Press Complaints Commission in Britain. Thinking people want responsive, responsible and accountable news organisations. I believe ombudsmen are one way to achieve that.
Time in Tunis