IN 1965 the Press Association of Jamaica (PAJ), the professional organisation of journalists, promulgated a Code of Ethics for journalists. Although rich in language, no provision was made in the code for sanctions. It was like a toothless tiger. The drafters of the code relied on selfregulation by the media. However, as the number of newspapers, magazines, radio and television stations quickly increased, competition became intense and this led to a large extent to irresponsible journalism and absence of accountability.

The argument about selfregulation has been prevalent since I entered journalism in 1947, but during the 17 years I was secretary of the PAJ and beyond, self-regulation has been a dismal failure.

In 2005 after discussion and consultation among the Mona School of Business, Caribbean Institute of Media and Communication, Media Association of Jamaica (MAJ) and the PAJ, a new Code of Practice was formulated to replace the 1965 Code of Ethics.

Claude Robinson, a distinguished journalist and a director of the Mona School of Business, worked tirelessly to bring into effect the Code of Practice and the terms of the Media Complaints Council to adjudicate complaints by the public against media.

The PAJ, under the enterprising leadership of Jenni Campbell, managing editor of The Gleaner, has accepted the Code of Practice and “is ready to go” with the Media Complaints Council, but the MAJ has been dragging its feet. This is surprising against the background that the MAJ, which represents media bosses, has waged a relentless war against government for changes in the libel and defamation laws to give greater air to freedom of the press and freedom of expression but is slow in putting its own house in order.

Without the participation of the MAJ which will, among other things, enforce compliance with the code, neither the Code of Practice nor the Complaints Council will serve any useful purpose.

A Code of Practice has now become an essential tool more than ever for journalists everywhere, in view of the hacking of phones and other illegal news-gathering activities which are now causing one of the worst crises in the history of the British media. Our code could prevent such things happening here.

It seems to me that the country cannot wait any longer for the MAJ to act. The government should therefore establish an Independent Media Complaints Commission.

In June last year the revised draft of the Code of Practice for Jamaican journalists and media organisations was circulated. The preamble said that all members of the media have a duty to maintain the highest professional and ethical standards and the code sets the benchmarks for these standards. It explains that Jamaican publishers, broadcasters and journalists believe that:

The rights of freedom of expression and the freedom to receive and impart information are fundamental rights of all human beings.

The agencies of mass communication, private and public, are carriers of public information, opinion and discussion essential to give practical effect to the right of freedom and the right of all individuals to access information.

Those rights carry obligations and require media organisations to represent and reflect the public interest at all times and journalists to perform their professional duties with intelligence, objectivity, accuracy and fairness.

Emphasising the importance of accuracy, truth and fairness in the practice of journalism the code said, among other things, that newspapers, periodicals, radio and television stations shall take due care not to publish or broadcast untrue, inaccurate, misleading or distorted material or information.

Special care should be made to avoid distortions made possible by the new information and communication technologies.

Every effort should be made to publish the main points of view or interpretations of an event or issue, regardless of whether the journalists or media organisation agree with such views, the code said.

Journalistic reporting should be free from bias and distinguished clearly among comment, conjecture and fact. Whenever it is recognised that an inaccuracy, misleading statement or distorted report has been disseminated, it should be corrected promptly and with due prominence. An apology should be published promptly whenever appropriate.

A media organisation should report fully and promptly the outcome of an investigation or court case on which it has reported, especially where the accused has been exonerated.

A media organisation should always report fully and promptly, fairly and accurately the outcome of any action for defamation to which it has been a party, except where there is a confidentiality agreement as part of the settlement.

A fair opportunity to reply to inaccuracies should be given to individuals or organisations when reasonably called for.

Any journalist whose action which is adjudged by the Media Complaints Council to be in breach of certain provisions of the code is obliged to abide by the remedy ordered by the council.

Space does not permit me to publish the entire Code of Practice.

The code is of such tremendous importance that I think the PAJ should publish it in its entirety in booklet form for distribution free of cost.