29. Self-regulation

University of Botswana

Department of Media Studies

BMS 226 ETHICS FOR MEDIA PROFESSIONALS

HANDOUT 28: SELF REGULATION

Definition:

The word “self” refers to the actor – e.g. a single company or a group of companies acting collectively, e.g. through a professional association.

“Regulation” refers to what the actor is doing.

Regulation has three components:

(1) legislation, that is, defining appropriate rules;

(2) enforcement, such as initiating actions against rule breakers

(3) adjudication --  deciding whether a violation has taken place and imposing an appropriate sanction.

“Self-regulation” means that the industry or profession rather than the government is doing the regulation. However, it is not necessarily the case that government involvement is entirely lacking.

The following is an extract from The Media Self-Regulation Guidebook, All questions and answers, Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, 2008.

www.osce.org/item/30697.html?ch=1117

Self regulation:

·         is about establishing minimum principles on ethics, accuracy, personal rights and so on, while fully preserving editorial freedom on what to report and what opinions to express.

·         helps the media to respond to legitimate complaints, and correct mistakes in a trial-and-error way.

·         is a pledge by quality-conscious media professionals to maintain a dialogue with the public.

A complaint mechanism is set up to deal with justified concerns in a rational and autonomous way.

In the media, obviously only those outlets whose journalists, editors and owners seek to produce a responsible press would engage in this dialogue.

Self-regulation can be set up both industry-wide and in-house.

Outside the media, political institutions and public figures are usually the main providers of complaints, as reporting and commenting on their activities is an important job for the serious media. But equally interested partners could be civil society’s protagonists such as business and labour, religious and minority organizations, traditional and newly established interest groups, and, of course, individual members of the public.

Merits of media self-regulation

By promoting standards, self-regulation helps maintain the media’s credibility with the public. This is particularly welcome in new democracies, most of which are also new to an independent press. Media self-regulation helps convince the public that the free media are not irresponsible.

At the same time, self-regulation protects the right of journalists to be independent, and to be judged for professional mistakes not by those in power but by their colleagues.

When it comes to correcting factual errors or violations of personal rights by the press, satisfaction over the judgments of self-regulatory bodies lessens pressure on the judiciary system to sanction journalists.

It is quite natural for media consumers to seek guarantees about the value of journalists’ information. Codes of ethics provide guidance on editorial standards, while complaint mechanisms offer a kind of ‘quality insurance’.

Complaints launched with self-regulatory bodies come at no cost, unlike court proceedings. This is a considerable advantage for the average citizen.

There are benefits for complaining politicians, such as the speedy resolution of disputes, and the satisfaction of seeing mistakes acknowledged publicly and voluntarily by the press.

Democracy is not only about disputes. It is also about a shared culture of disputing in a rational and fair manner. Governments, even if freely elected, are participants in the political contest and therefore are not best-suited to enforce rationality and fairness. Besides, democracy is incompatible with state custody of the press. Media self-regulation is an effort to impose democracy’s political culture, independent of political forces. It also advances the transition from a government-owned, state-controlled press to one owned and controlled by civil society.

Five reasons for the media to develop media self-regulation

1. It preserves editorial freedom;

2. It helps to minimize state interference;

3. It promotes media quality;

4. It is evidence of media accountability;

5. It helps readers access the media.

Media self-regulation versus regulating the media

To a certain extent media laws are necessary. But the press can only perform its crucial role as a watchdog of government if there is as little state control as possible.

In societies on the road to democracy, constitutional and legal guarantees are necessary to make press freedoms enforceable. For example:

·         Constitutions should prohibit censorship and protect freedom of expression;

·         Laws should guarantee free access to government information and protect journalists from being forced to disclose confidential sources of investigative stories;

·         Regulations should guarantee the fair and transparent administration of media business such as registration, licensing, ownership disclosure and taxation.

In a democracy, unavoidable exceptions from freedom of expression must be set in law. But in order to maintain fearless debate of public issues only very few types of speech offences should be criminalised. These include words or images that would clearly and imminently endanger the rule of law, society’s peace, or the safety of individuals: for example, incitement to violence, calls for discrimination, or distribution of child pornography.

Speech that ‘merely’ shocks, disturbs or offends should be dealt with in the civil-law courts. The same applies to speech that infringes on privacy, insults dignity or defames honour – even if committed intentionally by recklessly unprofessional journalists.

Can governmental regulations harm press freedoms?

Undue legal restrictions passed by freely elected governments can be almost as oppressive for the press as the dictatorial arbitrariness of the past. This is especially the case when legal restrictions are created (or misused) with the clear intention of eliminating independent reporting and opinion. Such malicious media laws might, for example:

·         Discriminate against non-state media outlets, in favour of the still-existing state-owned press, for example in the administration of such spheres as registration, taxation, printing, subscription and distribution;

·         Unfairly control the issue of broadcast licences;

·         Criminalize dissenting views or unwelcome investigative stories;

·         Use a selective approach in the application of criminal or civil provisions protecting personal rights.

Can governmental regulations unintentionally harm press freedoms while protecting other freedoms?

Time and again, the road to unnecessary legal interference is paved with good will, and prompted by the public’s real need for standards in journalism.

Many undue limitations are intended to “help” enhance ethics and quality, or “balance” freedom of the press against other important values, like state security, social peace, or personal rights. In the hope of eliminating hatefilled public debate, governments often overstep the legitimate limits of criminalisation of speech and allow prosecution of all kinds of intolerant, discriminatory speech, or simply views that offend others. Such laws tend to merely impose the tastes of the ruling parliamentary majority.

Additionally, democracies can be slow to remove speech restrictions that were conceived in times when different standards applied. Examples could be:

Criminalization of defamation, libel, and insult, instead of handling these offences in civil courts;

Punishment of “breach of secrecy” by civilians, including journalists, instead of limiting this crime to those who have an official duty to protect the secrets;

Special protection of high officials from verbal abuse.

Can governmental regulations make the press more professional or ethical?

No. True ethics standards can be created only by independent media professionals, and can be obeyed by them only voluntarily. Whether passed in good will or not, any attempt to impose standards on journalists by law will result in arbitrary limitation of their legitimate freedoms, and restriction of the free flow of information in society.

Of course, taxpayer-paid public-service broadcasters are obliged by law to report and comment in an objective, fair, and ethical manner. But public service requirements, too, must be formulated and enforced by independent professional bodies, and will only function if politicians refrain from interfering with editorial work.

Can self-regulation figure in the law?

That would be helpful in only one respect: by ensuring that ethical judgements of a self-regulation authority are not used in a court of justice by the criticised media professional, the state or the offended person.

Can self-regulation help promote better laws?

Yes, it can, but not by offering self-censorship. A self-regulated media can fight more effectively for the repeal of unnecessary regulations by:

Convincing the public that the media are conscious of the need for standards;

Naming and shaming corruption in the media;

Offering complaint resolution in justified cases.

What can governments do to promote self-regulation?

Governments can best promote self-regulation by:

Saying no to state ownership of the media;

Ensuring full freedom from governmental interference in the press;

Keeping the media pluralistic through anti-monopoly measures.

28. The Layers of Meaning in Ads

University of Botswana

Department of Media Studies

BMS 226 ETHICS FOR MEDIA PROFESSIONALS

HANDOUT 27: BASIC ANALYSIS OF THE LAYERS OF MEANING IN ADS

Katherine Frith (1998) discusses a tripartite approach to reading advertising. The examples below follow her understandings of ads in “Undressing the Ad: Reading Culture in Advertising.”

Frith's Level of Analysis	Description of the Ad Level
The Surface Meaning	"consists of the overall impression that a reader might get from quickly studying the advertisement...you can describe this surface level of meaning by simply listing all the objects and people in the ad" (1998:5).
The Advertiser's Intended Meaning	"is the sales message that the advertiser is trying to get across. Some marketers refer to this as the strategy behind the ad. It is the 'preferred' or expected meaning that a reader might get from the ad; the meaning that the advertiser intends for the reader to take with them" (ibid.).
The Cultural or Ideological Meaning	"...relies on the cultural knowledge and background of the reader. We all 'make sense' of ads by relating them to our culture and to the shared belief systems held in common by most people" (ibid.).

A Sample Reading of an Ad

Frith's Level of Analysis	Analyses of the Specific Ad
The Surface Meaning	The advertisement consists of a muscular male standing in his underwear with a nude female positioned on a bed wearing no clothes.
The Advertiser's Intended Meaning	The advertiser is trying to point out the comfort of the particular underwear and that the brand can be worn in different settings, they are lightweight, and unlike any other underwear on the market. As a product, the underwear will "benefit" men.
The Cultural or Ideological Meaning	The specific use of the phrase "for the benefit of mankind" connotes a number of ideological meanings. At one level, the phrase (as well as the composition) speaks to the constructions of patriarchy in U.S. culture. Men are typically the ones who "benefit" from popular. As well, the use of "mankind" suggests the superiority of males in society. The visual composition and poses of the two figures also speaks to the dominance of males over females. Another meaning is that of male sexuality and the notion that women are presented to serve men, sexually and in other respects. The advertiser will also benefit from the association of male virility and the specific product being sold in the ad.

SOURCE: Gender ads project

http://www.genderads.com/

27. Stereotyping in Advertising

University of Botswana

Department of Media Studies

BMS 226 ETHICS FOR MEDIA PROFESSIONALS

HANDOUT 26: STEREOTYPING IN ADVERTISING

Definitions

Stereotypes are assumptions we make about people based on generalisations about groups of people.

Gender refers to the attributes, behaviors, personality characteristics, and expectancies associated with a person's biological sex in a given culture; may be based on biology, may be learned, or may represent a combination of biological and cultural determinant.

Gender Identity refers to the sex with which individuals associate themselves.

Gender Stereotype Identification refers to the extent to which an individual identifies with the culture's gender stereotypes: masculinity and femininity.

Gender Roles

These beliefs are so ingrained in our consciousness that many of us think that gender roles are natural, so we don't question them. Even if we don't consciously subscribe to them as part of our own belief system, our culture bombards us with messages about what it means to be men and women today.

Gender stereotypes occur when you apply generic attributes, opinions or roles toward either gender. Gender stereotypes are apparent everywhere in our society, especially in the media. Companies display ads and commercials to gear toward the common belief of gender stereotypes. They portray women in housecleaning and child rearing roles to sell cleaners and baby products. They sell beer and cars to men by showing women in revealing outfits, or a sweating man working hard. These gender stereotypes are used to sell the products to the people they believe would use them most, showing them in the "situations" they would most likely be in.

There is a distinction between stereotypes and generalizations. Generalizing is a natural human behavior and is an attempt to simplify and categorize experiences. We naturally compare what we don't know to what we do know -- or think we know. For example, generalizations bring together a series of observations or experiences relating to an area or group in a simplified way. It's a generalization, therefore, to say that most men like professional sports, but this does not imply that all men do. Stereotypes, on the other hand, ascribe certain characteristics invariably to an entire group.

Stereotypes in advertising on children's television programs have been a special problem because of their potential impact on gender socialization and, subsequently, children's views of themselves and other people. In the United States, where children may view more than 20,000 commercials a year, the opportunity for influence is substantial. The possibility that children might acquire negative stereotypes through television viewing, therefore, has aroused concern among parents, educators, and members of the advertising industry.

Emotional Harm

When we unconsciously try to live up to the unattainable standards of the stereotype we can do physical and emotional harm to ourselves. Often, we don't notice this because we tend to mould ourselves to fit these stereotypes as a matter of course. This can be damaging. A boy with a very slight build who wants to be muscle-bound is fighting against himself if he tries to change his physique to match that of the stereotypical male. A girl who has an angular nose can fall into the same trap if she listens to her friends and/or relatives who are trying to convince her she needs a nose job.

Women's preoccupation with the beauty myth is evident in most cultures that consume television and other media influences. Sadly, more and more women want to be the stereotypical ideal, and they are preoccupied with either getting thin or staying thin.

Sexual Imagery in Advertising

The media, in whatever form, is a business that sells information and reaches millions of people. Advertisers have developed a multi-billion dollar industry to convince consumers that we need to buy their products. The Pepsi/Coke wars are a recent example of how marketers rally for the buying public's attention and loyalty. One thing is for sure: ads do influence our choices when we go to buy something. But the influence of advertisements is tricky to deal with because they affect us subliminally.

We often see ads that feature superficially beautiful or "desirable" models, so it comes as no surprise that sexual imagery is used to sell products. But depicting people this way can also contribute to gender stereotypes.

The pressures on girls are exacerbated by the media's increasing tendency to portray very young girls in sexual ways. Over the past decade, the fashion industry has begun to use younger and younger models, and now commonly presents 12- and 13-year-old girls as if they were women. Camera angles (where the model is often looking up, presumably at a taller man), averted eyes, wounded facial expressions, and vulnerable poses mimic the visual images common in pornographic media.

The most cursory examination of media confirms that young girls are being bombarded with images of sexuality, often dominated by stereotypical portrayals of women and girls as powerless, passive victims.

Images of Women

Advertisements not only sell products, but sell ideas about romance, sex, success, beauty, and power. Advertisements will have you believe that women in the real world are all aged under 40; that no one is disabled and everyone is heterosexual; that a woman's body is in constant need of improvement; that women need to look young, 'beautiful,' made-up, sprayed up, very thin, and perfectly groomed.

How the Media Define Masculinity

For several decades now, media critics and feminists alike have been examining the role of the media in creating and reinforcing stereotypical representations of women and femininity. But only recently have they expanded the research to consider how the media also construct, inform and reinforce prevalent ideas about men and masculinity.

Families, friends, teachers, and community leaders all play a role in helping boys define what it means to be a man. Mainstream media representations also play a role in reinforcing ideas about what it means to be a "real" man in our society. In most media portrayals, male characters are rewarded for self-control and the control of others, aggression and violence, financial independence, and physical desirability.

The media’s portrayal of men tends to reinforce men’s social dominance. The majority of male characters in media are heterosexual; male characters are more often associated with the public sphere of work, rather than the private sphere of the home, and issues and problems related to work are more significant than personal issues.

Masculinity and Advertising

In its study of masculinity and sports media, the research group Children Now found that most commercials directed to male viewers tend to air during sports programming. Women rarely appear in these commercials, and when they do, they’re generally portrayed in stereotypical ways.

In fact, in his analysis of gender in advertising, author and University of North Texas professor Steve Craig argues that women tend to be presented as "rewards" for men who choose the right product. He describes such commercials as "narratives of playful escapades away from home and family." They operate, he says, at the level of fantasy—presenting idealized portrayals of men and women. When he focused specifically on beer commercials, Craig found that the men were invariably "virile, slim and white"—and the women always "eager for male companionship."

Author and academic Susan Bordo (University of Kentucky) has also analyzed gender in advertising, and agrees that men are usually portrayed as virile, muscular and powerful. Their powerful bodies dominate space in the ads. For women, the focus is on slenderness, dieting, and attaining a feminine ideal; women are always presented as not just thin, but also weak and vulnerable.

These critics and others suggest that just as traditional advertising has for decades sexually objectified women and their bodies, today’s marketing campaigns are objectifying men in the same way.

FURTHER READING

Morna, C L and Ndlovu Sikhonzile S 2007, Mirror on the Mirror, Gender and Advertising in Southern Africa, Gender Links, Johannesburg.

http://www.genderlinks.org.za/article/gender-and-advertising-in-southern-africa-2007-07-16

Gill, R 2008, ‘Empowerment/sexism: figuring female sexual agency in contemporary advertising’, Feminism & Psychology, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 35 – 60, ,<http://fap.sagepub.com/content/18/1/35.full.pdf+html>

Media Awareness Network, www.media-awareness.ca