Beyond clickbait and commerce

Jonathan
Heawood
and the publication of guidance on the code, and by allowing
publishers to display a kitemark to help the public distinguish
ethically regulated journalism from other forms of expression.
Any private benefit to regulated news publishers under such a
system would be minimal and incidental to the public benefit
(Vernor-Miles, Flackett and Rees-Pulley v Charity Commission for
England & Wales 2015: 5).
The tribunal found this evidence regarding the public benefit in
ethical journalism ‘persuasive’ (ibid: 9), and concluded that, by
formalising and upholding a clear code of journalism standards
independent press regulation was capable of advancing the
ethical and moral improvement of the community – a recognised
charitable purpose. The tribunal, therefore, upheld the IPRT’s
appeal and directed the commission to enter the IPRT on the
register of charities. This decision was underpinned by the tribunal’s
acceptance that there is a recognised body of journalism ethics, and
the implicit acknowledgement that journalism produced according
to such ethical standards is likely to be of benefit to the public.
Conclusion
If charitable news organisations are to demonstrate that their
journalistic activities are directed towards a charitable purpose; that
this purpose will, in fact, be achieved; and that this purpose will
benefit the entire public, or a sufficient section of the public, then
they must – among other things – be able to show that their work
is produced according to ethical standards. This is not sufficient to
achieve charitable status, but it is a necessary precondition.
By registering the IPRT as a charity, the tribunal has created a
precedent in charity law for the existence of such ethical standards
of journalism. The tribunal did not see any need to define ethical
journalism, but relied as evidence upon the existence of a set of
recognised principles, as distilled by the Council of Europe (Council
of Europe 2011). This precedent should help news organisations
show the Charity Commission that they will fulfil their charitable
purposes by researching and publishing stories with full regard for
the rights and interests of any individuals concerned, and of society
as a whole, according to a recognised code of ethics.
Moreover, by enabling IMPRESS to operate as an independent press
regulator, with financial assistance from the IPRT, the tribunal has
helped to create a framework within which the ethical standards
of news organisations may indeed be formalised and upheld. News
organisations which are independently regulated by a body such as
IMPRESS can demonstrate to the commission that they follow high
ethical standards of journalism. This should provide the commission
with the necessary reassurance that, whilst not all journalism is
charitable, certain forms of journalism are charitable, and that
92 Copyright 2016-2/3. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics. All rights reserved. Vol 13, No 2/3 2016