ASBPE Exclusive Research
Members say ethics code
vital to editorial
and sales
In a huge response to
ASBPE’s questionnaire,
ethical lapses are noted, along with a
lack of reader understanding about what
the standards are.
By Robin Sherman, Associate Director, Newsletter
Editor
ASBPE members feel very strongly about editorial
ethics issues, according to an online study just
completed. For proof, look at the high response
rate of 43.6% to the 39-question survey and the
large numbers of members (92%) who believe ethics
codes are important to have.
The survey examined the
attitudes and behavior surrounding a
number of ethical questions. Responses suggested
certain
provisions that ought to be in a code
or guideline, and indicated that transparency — publishing
the code to make it available to staffers
and readers — must
be considered.
Some 360 B2B magazines have ASBPE members. The
survey invitation was sent via SurveyMonkey to the
highest-ranking member of each magazine. Responses
came from 157 members (157 magazines), a very high
response rate for a survey.
Why the ethics research?
CFO magazine. “A
lot has changed since the Society last
did an update five years ago.
““The current media
environment invited a survey, too, with new controversy
raging over product placement by advertisers and
over activities among journalists at reputable
news organizations that are questionable at best.”
In preparation for an ASBPE code revision, the
Society has studied the codes of other journalism-related
associations and publishers. Additionally, ASBPE
has had some spirited discussions by members at
our online discussion forum.
A new code is expected to be in place some time
in the first quarter of next year.
While the vast majority
of respondents (92%) said it is important for
an organization or a magazine to have a code,
only 59% said that editorial codes of ethics were
in place at their magazine or their organization.
Of those 59%, 37% said the codes were formal (officially
adopted), while 42% said they were informal, defined
as an “ethical editorial
environment&8221; in which no code had been officially
adopted.
Environments often lack ethics
In addition to their strong feelings for a code,
nearly 83% of respondents felt that such a code
should offer both a general statement of principles
and provide guidelines on specific issues, such
as accepting gifts from sources or advertisers.
The response strongly suggested that editors want
help in dealing with specific ethical situations.
Among those publications with a formal editorial
code of ethics, 64% of respondents said that their
company or organization backs them up and buys into
the code, while a significant 32% minority said
that is only sometimes the case.
Among editors whose publications lack a code, 53%
said their company backs them up or buys into the
ethical editorial environment. All the remaining
47%, however, said that is only sometimes the case.
The study indicated that
many (31%) of the respondents’ organizations
use ASBPE’s current code of ethics as a template
for development of their own codes. ASBPE’s
guidelines are used by members more than
any other organization’s code. Additionally,
ASBPE’s
code was said to be more useful than other
organizations’.
Survey in line with previous results
The survey, which called for a large number of
open-ended responses, suggested that the current
world of editorial ethics leaves much to be desired.
These sentiments, along with the general economic
climate and other business upheavals, are in line
with the results of a survey ASBPE conducted two
years ago, in which 76% of members who responded
said they faced ad-related editorial demands, and
30% said they succumbed.
The current results are
also in line with ASBPE’s
salary survey last year, which had a sample
of almost 3,900 editors and which indicated that
43% of editors are unhappy with their jobs, partly
over ethics issues.
Little transparency for readers
Almost 85% of respondents said that their magazine
or company/organization does not officially publish
the code of ethics, or other statement of ethical
principles, for readers to see.
The open-ended responses
to the follow-up question here — “Why not?” — yielded
interesting replies. Common answers included “I
hadn’t thought of it” or “We should.
I intend to pursue it.”
Others responded that such codes are internal documents
on how business is conducted, and that if the principles
are followed, it should be apparent to the readership.
Non-editorial staff have ethical lapses
The survey suggested that editors have other problems
with the ethical codes that are in place today.
In answer to a question about whether ethical violations
had been observed among staff, 40% said they were
aware of sales staff engaging in unethical behavior.
The response for awareness of unethical behavior
among editorial staff was 22%, with 19% saying they
were aware of such behavior with the person holding
the publisher job title.
Enforcement is problematic
Additionally, 70% of respondents
from magazines with a code said that either there
are no consequences when it is violated, or that
they don’t know
of any consequences.
An open-ended question on what types of ethical
breaches are seen the most yielded a huge response.
Answers ranged from notations that publications
blur the line between advertising and editorial
to cases of employees owning stock in companies
that advertise.
In those cases in which
there is enforcement of ethics-code breaches,
one respondent — from
a magazine on which all staffers must sign
the code — said
formal investigations are held when a violation
is reported.
Among the larger number
of respondents whose organizations didn’t enforce, answers about the alternative
course taken in the case of an ethical lapse suggested
a subjective response. “I’d check my
gut,” said one. “Use common sense,” said
another. And, according to a third, “I’d
check with all parties.”
ASBPE members can access the complete
survey results online.
Not a member? Find out
how to join now.
Download
a printer-friendly press
release about the survey. (228K
Word doc)
What some members want in an ethics
code
- The code
must make clear that … reporting,
writing, editing and presenting
information … is not created
or adapted to conform to the
needs of advertisers,
the predilections of publishers,
or, in fact, the arbitrary whims
of editors. Reporters and editors
do not make sales calls. They
do not advise advertisers. They
do not accept more than token
gifts or reasonable entertainment — no
junkets, no favors. … Any
and all possible conflicts (stock
ownership, family relationships)
must be disclosed.
- Clarification
for readers of what is paid content and
what is editorial content.
- No prior review of edit
material. [A] corrections
policy [is needed].
- Disciplinary actions … against those who don't follow
the code of ethics.
- Statement of editorial
values superseding advertising and
revenue-producing values.
- Statement that the publication
pays all expenses— not
advertisers or sources.
- Rules about how stories
are covered, including
digital media, and how we treat
sources, confidential materials,
unnamed sources.
- Editors should have the
final say in what gets printed.
Companies interviewed should
not be allowed to review articles
before publication, except
for checking technical accuracy.
- A clear
position on employees' accepting
outside work — freelance
assignments or part-time teaching,
for example. Clear direction
regarding employees' political
activities and expressions
of opinion in blogs, columns,
…
- The role of the editor
on sales calls.
- We need to hold ourselves
to the type of standards we are
asking of our readers,
or specifically of the companies
that are the primary readership.
Transparency and disclosure.
|
Back
to ASBPE News page
|
