À l’heure où le modèle de l’autorégulation des médias connaît un succès grandissant en Europe, avec la multiplication du nombre de conseils de presse, mais aussi une remise en question fondamentale, suite à l’affaire anglo-saxonne de News of the World, ce travail de recherche tente de définir les bienfaits et les limites du modèle de l’autorégulation en matière de liberté des médias. D’une manière générale, cette recherche tente de montrer dans quelle mesure une responsabilisation collective des journalistes peut soutenir et promouvoir la liberté des journalistes. Pour le comprendre, cette recherche explore les liens entre liberté et responsabilité des médias. Elle montre que si l’État et les cours de justice, en tant que représentants démocratiques, peuvent être les mieux attribués pour définir les responsabilités de journalistes idéalement au service de l’intérêt public, d’autres considèrent qu’il faut laisser aux journalistes le soin de définir leurs responsabilités eux-mêmes pour limiter tant que possible les tentations étatiques de mettre sous contrôle les “chiens de garde” du système démocratique. Cette recherche nous enseigne que le juste équilibre entre régulation et autorégulation des médias dépend alors de la nature du régime politique en place ainsi que des traditions et cultures journalistiques. Elle montre qu’une responsabilisation collective des journalistes par l’autorégulation peut promouvoir et défendre la liberté des médias, lorsque des garde-fous existent pour limiter l’instrumentalisation du système. Elle montre aussi que l’autorégulation ne peut en aucun cas créer les conditions de la liberté des médias. Cette recherche souligne enfin les avantages de l’autorégulation des médias à l’heure du numérique. / At a time when the model of media self-regulation is becoming increasingly popular in Europe, with an increasing number of press councils, but also at a time when the model is being fundamentally questioned following the Anglo-Saxon scandal of the News of the World, this research attempts to define the benefits and limits of media self-regulation for media freedom. In general, this research tries to show how the collective accountability of journalists can support and promote media freedom. In other words, this research explores the relationship between media freedom and accountability. It shows that if the State and the courts, as democratic representatives, can be attributed to better define the responsibilities of journalists ideally serving the public interest, others consider that journalists should rather define their responsibilities themselves in order to limit as much as possible the temptation of state control of the "watchdogs" of the democratic system. This research tells us that the right balance between regulation and self-regulation of the media depends on the nature of the political regime and journalistic cultures and traditions. It shows that a collective journalists’ accountability can promote and defend media freedom when safeguards exist to limit the exploitation of the system. It also shows that media self-regulation can in no way create the conditions for media freedom. Finally, this research highlights the benefits of media self-regulation in the digital era.

Grâce aux nanotechnologies, l’être humain peut maîtriser la matière à l’échelle du nanomètre — soit au niveau des atomes et des molécules. Les matériaux obtenus suite à ces manipulations présentent des propriétés nouvelles qui les rendent très intéressants pour nombre d’applications techniques, et ce dans tous les domaines technoscientifiques. Ainsi, les nanotechnologies sont souvent considérées comme les prémisses d’une profonde révolution technologique et sociale. Toutefois, si les nanotechnologies intéressent investisseurs, gouvernement, entreprises et universités, elles soulèvent aussi des questions éthiques, notamment au sujet de leur toxicité, de leurs retombées et de la modification de l’être humain. À ces questions s’ajoutent plusieurs interrogations sur la gouvernance des nanotechnologies : comment, en effet, encadrer en amont le développement de celles-ci pour éviter d’éventuelles conséquences néfastes en aval? Parmi ces interrogations, le rôle des médias dans les relations entre les développeurs de nanotechnologies et le public est souvent mentionné. Certains voient dans les médias un acteur auquel les chercheurs pourraient recourir pour établir un dialogue avec le public afin d’assurer un développement harmonieux des nanotechnologies. Si cette recommandation semble très pertinente, il n’existe, à notre connaissance, aucune étude empirique pour en vérifier la faisabilité auprès des acteurs concernés (chercheurs, médias, etc.). Dans le cadre de cette thèse, nous avons donc voulu examiner et analyser les perceptions des chercheurs et des journalistes québécois envers des initiatives médiatiques pour baliser le développement des nanotechnologies. Pour ce faire, nous avons procédé à une étude qualitative auprès de vingt (20) chercheurs en nanobiotechnologies/nanomédecine et dix (10) journalistes spécialisés en vulgarisation scientifique. L’analyse des entretiens avec les répondants a révélé que si les acteurs rencontrés sont favorables envers de telles initiatives, il existe plusieurs contraintes pouvant gêner une telle entreprise. Suite à l’examen de ces contraintes, nous avons suggéré des initiatives concrètes que les chercheurs québécois pourraient mettre en place pour mieux baliser le développement des nanotechnologies à l’aide d’un dialogue avec le public. Ces suggestions consistent notamment à créer des médias privés pour les chercheurs, à recourir aux médias indépendants et à investir le web. De telles initiatives, cependant, ne peuvent s’obtenir qu’au prix d’un remaniement des priorités des chercheurs. / Thanks to nanotechnologies, mankind can control matter at the nanometer scale, on the level of individual atoms and molecules. Materials obtained following these nanoscale manipulations demonstrate novel properties with the potential for application to all scientific and technological disciplines. Nanotechnologies are therefore often considered a foundation for a deep technological and social revolution. However, while nanotechnologies interest investors, government, private enterprises and universities, they also raise ethical questions, particularly regarding their toxicity, their outcome and the modification of human beings. On top of these ethical questions several other interrogations arise with respect to the governance of nanotechnologies: how, indeed, should their development be initially monitored in order to avoid eventual negative consequences in the future? Among these many questions, the role of the media in the relations between the developers of nanotechnologies and the public is often mentioned. Some see in the media an actor that researchers might refer to in order to establish a dialogue with the public to insure a harmonious development of nanotechnologies. While this recommendation seems very relevant, no empirical study exists to our knowledge to assess its feasibility among the concerned stakeholders (researchers, media). Within the scope of this thesis, we thus wanted to examine and analyze the perception of researchers and journalists from Quebec towards media initiatives to monitor the development of nanotechnologies. To do so, we proceeded to perform a qualitative study with twenty (20) researchers in the fields of nanobiotechnology/nanomedicine and ten (10) journalists specialized in scientific popularization. The analysis of interviews with responders revealed that while the concerned parties are in favour of these initiatives, there are several constraints that may impede such an enterprise. Following the study of these constraints, we have suggested concrete initiatives that Quebec researchers may implement in order to better monitor the development of nanotechnologies through a dialogue with the public. These suggestions mainly consist in creating private media for researchers, resorting to independent media and engaging the World Wide Web. Such initiatives, however, can only be obtained at the price of a realignment of researchers’ priorities.

Recent attacks on media freedom in South Africa, that includes the ruling ANC party’s proposal for statutory regulation of the press, have seen press self-regulation fiercely contested and the ombudsman of the Press Council of South Africa (PCSA) defending the press’ constitutional right to freedom of expression. Extensive arguments have been made by government, the public and the press for other forms of press regulation, such as statutory and independent co-regulation. In addition no accurate, detailed trends arising from complaints the ombudsman has dealt with in recent years, have been freely available on which arguments in such a debate could be based. This research analyses the complaints dealt with by the press ombudsman in recent years in order to evaluate the present self-regulatory system, which is based primarily on the theories of freedom of expression and social responsibility of the press. The analyses involves determining what trends exist in complaints cases that the ombudsman, Joe Thloloe, has dealt with since he took office in August 2007, until August 2011 when a Review of his office was published by the PCSA. The study takes a qualitative approach, with some degree of quantification, and utilises document analysis and qualitative content analysis as data collection methods to analyse 593 cases, with specific focus on government complaints which form 15% of all cases analysed. The findings reflect that the ombudsman’s approach in dealing with complaints was fair, that he displayed intolerance for transgressions and that his rulings were free of any obvious bias. This is evident in, amongst other findings, the very few appeals lodged against his rulings and even less successful appeals. In addition the press often voluntarily corrected their mistakes before prompted by the ombudsman. The findings also dispel some of the ANC’s criticisms that have led to its calls for statutory press regulation, such as the public and government’s acceptance of the self-regulation system, complaints from government largely having involved accuracy and not privacy as the ANC claimed, and that government’s failure to sign the legal waiver often resulted in cases being dismissed. The findings also point to a significant increase in complaints, specifically from government, in the year 2010, which is the year in which the ANC renewed its calls for statutory regulation. This does not necessarily reflect a sudden decline in the quality of journalism but rather indicates that the ruling party differed fundamentally in its philosophical thinking regarding the press, which was perhaps informed by a developmental model of the press rather than the social responsibility model on which the present system is based. In this sense the government sees it fit to interfere or censor the press if it feels the system is not performing. The findings show the ombudsman’s office lacked proper record-keeping from which accurate statistics could be derived, leaving a gap for criticism against the ombudsman. In addition, most often complaints against newspapers involved accuracy and fairness (such as not asking for comment). As is evident in several complaints falling outside the ombudsman’s mandate and the high number of dismissed cases, the findings also point to a lack of awareness or information of the system and of the ombudsman’s roles. In light of the theoretical frameworks that set out how the self-regulation system, which is entrenched in the notion of press freedom, can enhance the cause of press freedom by its ombudsman enforcing a socially responsible Press Code, the findings ultimately lead to the conclusion that the ombudsman’s work has advanced the cause of press freedom in South Africa during the research period. / Thesis (MA (Communication Studies))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2013

Recent attacks on media freedom in South Africa, that includes the ruling ANC party’s proposal for statutory regulation of the press, have seen press self-regulation fiercely contested and the ombudsman of the Press Council of South Africa (PCSA) defending the press’ constitutional right to freedom of expression. Extensive arguments have been made by government, the public and the press for other forms of press regulation, such as statutory and independent co-regulation. In addition no accurate, detailed trends arising from complaints the ombudsman has dealt with in recent years, have been freely available on which arguments in such a debate could be based. This research analyses the complaints dealt with by the press ombudsman in recent years in order to evaluate the present self-regulatory system, which is based primarily on the theories of freedom of expression and social responsibility of the press. The analyses involves determining what trends exist in complaints cases that the ombudsman, Joe Thloloe, has dealt with since he took office in August 2007, until August 2011 when a Review of his office was published by the PCSA. The study takes a qualitative approach, with some degree of quantification, and utilises document analysis and qualitative content analysis as data collection methods to analyse 593 cases, with specific focus on government complaints which form 15% of all cases analysed. The findings reflect that the ombudsman’s approach in dealing with complaints was fair, that he displayed intolerance for transgressions and that his rulings were free of any obvious bias. This is evident in, amongst other findings, the very few appeals lodged against his rulings and even less successful appeals. In addition the press often voluntarily corrected their mistakes before prompted by the ombudsman. The findings also dispel some of the ANC’s criticisms that have led to its calls for statutory press regulation, such as the public and government’s acceptance of the self-regulation system, complaints from government largely having involved accuracy and not privacy as the ANC claimed, and that government’s failure to sign the legal waiver often resulted in cases being dismissed. The findings also point to a significant increase in complaints, specifically from government, in the year 2010, which is the year in which the ANC renewed its calls for statutory regulation. This does not necessarily reflect a sudden decline in the quality of journalism but rather indicates that the ruling party differed fundamentally in its philosophical thinking regarding the press, which was perhaps informed by a developmental model of the press rather than the social responsibility model on which the present system is based. In this sense the government sees it fit to interfere or censor the press if it feels the system is not performing. The findings show the ombudsman’s office lacked proper record-keeping from which accurate statistics could be derived, leaving a gap for criticism against the ombudsman. In addition, most often complaints against newspapers involved accuracy and fairness (such as not asking for comment). As is evident in several complaints falling outside the ombudsman’s mandate and the high number of dismissed cases, the findings also point to a lack of awareness or information of the system and of the ombudsman’s roles. In light of the theoretical frameworks that set out how the self-regulation system, which is entrenched in the notion of press freedom, can enhance the cause of press freedom by its ombudsman enforcing a socially responsible Press Code, the findings ultimately lead to the conclusion that the ombudsman’s work has advanced the cause of press freedom in South Africa during the research period. / Thesis (MA (Communication Studies))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2013

While journalistic ethics exists in the Untied States today, it works primarily to address dilemmas in the profession, as opposed to working to comprehensively understand journalism in relation to its public duties. This role in United States journalism is not only misunderstood by the majority of journalists working in the media industry, it is also misunderstood by the public. This misinterpretation is directly linked to the concepts of cultural separation between the 'natural' laws that run the market place and those things in society that influence everything else. In this sense, journalism has become an industry working in the market place. Essentially, the product of completely corporatising the media industry has created a gap between the role of journalism in a democratic society and the current state of journalism in the United States. That said, the relationship between the media and democracy can be traced back through the history of United States democracy and the subsequent history of journalism as a profession that was an essential part to keeping the public sphere of democratic debate healthy. A section of journalists, public journalists, currently attempt to heed the public responsibility needed to create this space for democratic debate. However, these journalists, though earnest in their pursuit to rebuild the type of journalism needed to create this democratic sphere, cannot reach the masses effectively without more funding and more autonomy. Likewise, the public broadcast station (PBS) in the United States could be enhanced in many ways with more funding and more autonomy. Such funding and autonomy for media in the United States could come from a tax-payer funded public broadcast station. And though not all media need to bear the responsibility of journalism focused on public life and politics, a section of the mass media should commit itself to creating a sphere to enhance democratic debate. This thesis explores the necessity of a government funded mass media source in the United States. Given that United States media and democracy are inherently linked, as I will aim to show through the development of democratic history and the development of liberal democracy in the United States today, the ethical need for a media source that can fulfil its democratic duties.

I deal in master thesis with reflection of audiovisual media in the Czech Republic and their work with events of terroristic attacks of Islamic State. I focused on main broadcasting which are the most representative material for the form of image of approaches of particular media. In theoretic part I deal with organization Islamic state and symbiotic relation between terrorism and media. We encouter a new phenomena of terrorism which can adapt for new media, social sites and which can work also with audiovisual agenda. I try to get closer and try to set the ethics of west media and I am looking for answers which are underlay of chosen literature or contemporary codified standards (f.e. BBC Editorial Guidelines). I compare new phenomena of terrorism and media reflection with current sociological trends and create terrorism and his work in media in "liquid times". In practical part I deal with specific events of terroristic attacks of ISIS in Europe and I search ethical questionable aspects in content of czech AV media. I am looking for specific points on the relief of terroristic attacks which broadcasters do. Based on the theoretical part I focus next to primary also on secondary ethically questionable aspects which are result of symbiotic relation between media and terrorism.

No description available.

No description available.