Above and Below the Belt

Zaporizhzhia National University recently hosted a roundtable called “The Moral Choice of Ukrainian Journalists in the Current Political Situation.” The School of Journalism’s decision to hold this event was spurred by La ysa Ivshyna’s interview with the Internet publication Telekritika (“Larysa Ivshyna: “Journalists to Blame for the Warped System of Coordinates, ” http://www.telekritika.kiev.ua/interview? id=22076).The interview was also discussed in Kamyanets-Podilsky.

ZAPORIZHZHIA: “IT IS IMMORAL TO BE UNPROFESSIONAL”

Many experts believe that one of the main problems of the Ukrainian media is that they are in no way freer after breaking loose from the notorious temnyky (media guidelines). It is no surprise, then, that the “online signal” from Den/The Day’s editor-in-chief caused such a ripple. For such matters as journalistic ethics and the globalization of the national information space have a direct bearing not only on journalists but also on information users.

“We are an open society but not a drive-through courtyard. The picture should in fact be as follows: here are the interests of Ukrainian citizens, and here are the interests of Ukrainian society. And we should be viewing what is going on in the information society through the prism of these interests. So far this is not the case, and it’s a very serious national problem. If we start thinking at least a little in this manner, this will help single out those who still have professionalism and conscience.” This is one of the major problems of the national media environment that Den/The Day’s editor-in-chief broached in her interview with Telekritika. Touching on this again at the Zaporizhzhia University teach-in, Larysa IVSHYNA noted, “Ukrainian journalists have committed themselves to improving the state as a machine and helping society to understand what kind of state it wants and become actively involved in this process, as well as assisting those individuals who have at least a modicum of ability to improve the state.” According to Ms. Ivshyna, “the chief moral choice of Ukrainian journalists is finally to decide whether they are Ukrainian and prepared to help their compatriots become a successful nation in the family of nations that have already made their way in the world. There are also very many things related to journalistic ethics, level of professionalism, the intra-corporate pattern of behavior, as well as certain absolutely unacceptable, ‘below- the-belt,’ matters that are not usually discussed in decent society but which unfortunately still exist in our community. I mean character assassination, articles written-to-order, mud-slinging, freedom of speech used for heaping on trash rather than propagating positive values and engaging in quality journalism.” Den/The Day’s editor-in-chief thinks that the first moral principle is that journalists must strive to be good professionals, because “nowadays it is amoral to lack professionalism.”

This view was also shared by Vasyl LYZANCHUK, professor at Lviv Ivan Franko National University, who talked about the reverse side of the coin. “In its turn, a high level of professionalism cannot and has no right to be amoral.” Speaking about the most optimal ways of instilling in young journalists the desire to convey true information, he also noted that young journalists and students should understand that “information and the mass media are not so much only a commodity as the bearer of certain principles of democracy, humanism, propaganda of culture, etc.”

Leonid SOSNYTSKY, deputy editor-in-chief of the newspaper Zaporozka Sich, opined that the problem of morality in Ukrainian journalism is caused by the fact that “Ukraine is in a state of a full-scale war of information extermination, in which we are the victims. You must have noticed a lot of campaigns now underway in our press, including so-called Ukrainian newspapers, not to mention certain television channels, which have suddenly, as though obeying an order, have begun to spotlight Melnychenko because they want to rekindle the tape scandal for some reason. Then someone struck a deal with someone else, i.e., the former handed something over to the latter, and the subject was dropped for a month.” Incidentally, speaking about amoral attitudes in the Ukrainian media, journalist Natalia Fedushchak (US), said “Ukrainian society has not yet learned to think critically, which is a social problem, not just a journalistic one.”

Another factor that Mr. Sosnytsky recalled is the absence of what is known as a truly competitive environment. “Today, we have competition among money and managers who know how to market their commodity. But we don’t have any competition whatsoever among ideas, views, or journalistic talents.” Asked by The Day’s correspondent to sum up the roundtable, Mr. Sosnytsky agreed with Ms. Ivshyna that Ukrainian journalism should be free of the dilemma “either you will earn well or you will be honest.” Time is clamouring for different rules of the game. At the same time, the deputy editor of Zaporozka Sich noted that this should be a system, not a feat carried out by individual enthusiasts. What is needed, among other things, is comprehensive research into the problem of journalistic morality, the establishment of criteria, followed by a relevant governmental decision, because “ journalistic morality is a matter of national security.”

The president has called for a debate on journalistic standards, which has already begun in the interview with Den/The Day’s editor-in-chief. This topic was also the focal point of the speech by Viktor KOSTIUK, Deputy Dean of Zaporizhzhia National University’s School of Journalism. “On the one hand, we are seeing high-profile media coverage of current events. Journalists now have an opportunity to show their civic stance and put into practice the principles of impartiality, patriotism, humanism, and democracy. On the other hand, we are witness to the absence of an elementary culture of freedom and violations of ethical norms that are supposed to be an integral part of a journalist’s career. I wholeheartedly agree with Ms. Ivshyna that ‘ethics are our weakest point’.” In Dr. Kostiuk’s view, “today we should be talking about reorienting ourselves from “freedom of morality, impartiality, and culture” to culture of freedom as the only way to conduct journalistic activity.”

KAMYANETS-PODILSKY: LESSONS FROM THE “BOONDOCKS”

The next day Larysa Ivshyna’s interview was the focus of public discussions (this time in her absence) in Kamyanets-Podilsky on the initiative of Oleksandr Zavalniuk, rector of the local state university, which now has a journalism faculty. The rector came across the interview with Ms. Ivshyna when he was surfing the Web; he then shared his impressions with his colleagues.

“The formal reason for Ms. Ivsyna’s interview was the European Court’s ruling on Den/The Day’s case,” Mykola Vaskiv, Ph.D., reminded the audience in his speech. “One of the few European-standard Ukrainian newspapers managed to secure a court ruling in its favor after never-ending litigation in Ukrainian courts at all levels.”

“Unfortunately, this significant event, which occurred after the Orange Revolution, went almost unnoticed by politicians, lawmakers, and journalists,” said Bohdan TELENKO, editor of the Khmelnytsky-based newspaper Proskuriv. “This is why this paper has reprinted Larysa Ivshyna’s interview with Telekritika and is looking forward to an enthusiastic response from readers.”

Mr. Telenko believes that the events of 1999, recalled by the European Court’s ruling on Den/The Day, were the precursor of the Maidan revolution. “It was the only newspaper that saw through the evil schemes of Kuchma’s spin doctors, who were scaring the electorate with the spectre of communism: look, here’s the alternative — either Kuchma or a return to a totalitarian system. Who was helping those spin doctors? The overwhelming majority of ‘the ideological front soldiers.’ And what was the result? Loss of trust on the part of readers, listeners, and viewers in the media as a whole. But what Den/The Day and the individual whom the newspaper supported as presidential candidate, Yevhen Marchuk, sowed in 1999 bore fruit in 2004.”

Olha Zhmudovska, editor and publisher of the newspaper Fortetsia (Kamyanets-Podilsky), recalled the events of 1999: “Society was not prepared to face the truth. Kuchma was well aware that nobody would accept the truth. So what Den/The Day kept writing hardly caused a ripple. You can’t feed society what it doesn’t need. Now the situation is different. Is the press giving society what it is expecting?”

Ms. Zhmudovska singled out the positive fact that media people “can now afford at least to want,” whereas earlier they were afraid to do even that. “Nevertheless, as experience shows, the new government is not exactly prepared to reckon with any opinion: they are asking us not to criticize them; they want us to let them work, and finally (at least in the provinces) they want us to write what they want.”

Accepting Ms. Ivshyna’s basic viewpoints on the pressing problems of journalistic ethics, Ms. Zhmudovska also believes that journalists should tell the people that “nobody is going to give them anything good just like that”-people have to know how to defend their rights. And it is the press that should help formulate general rules for all individuals.

Expressing gratitude to the organizers of this conference (and expressing regret that it was not attended by the regional branch heads of the National Journalists League’s), Mr. Telenko stated that the debate on this pressing problem “was held not in the capital, not even in Khmelnytsky, but in Kamyanets-Podilsky, a district-level city, once again confirming Ms. Ivshyna’ view that the “boondocks” are in no way a geographical notion.”