By Jan van Groesen
President, Media-Ombudsman Nederland

These remarks were made by Jan van Groesen president of Media-ombudsman The Netherlands.

One and a half years ago, we set up our foundation for Dutch journalism in order to cope with the rising tide of criticism of the press and the degrading of its reliability and credibility. Our effort is based on the analysis that the future of responsible journalism is not very bright.

At the beginning of the 21st century, we are living in an era of information chaos. The hectic development of the media world during the last decade has prompted a radical change of the image of the press. Traditional standards, regulations and conventions in journalism have become, at least partly, invalidated. The rise of the Internet, the worldwide use of mobile phones, the making of the E-newspaper, the huge number of Web sites, Weblogs, podcasts, etc., are all part of a revolution which is fundamentally affecting the profession of journalism.

Moreover, the widespread commercialization of the branch has given speed to a downfall of responsible journalism, which for all of us should be of great concern. Since the news media, especially the newspapers, have been taken over by big conglomerates or even by very aggressive hedge funds, as we have experienced in The Netherlands, emphasis has been put on marketing and making profit in order to please the shareholders. In an exhausting competition, the news media are trying to overhaul each other with the same cheap and superficial stuff, known as infotainment and entertainment, neglecting more and more the really important issues and the badly needed background information. It is a strategy based on the assumption that modern citizens are no longer committed to social, ideological or even moral perspectives, but are only interested in consumption.

Whereas the journalistic profession was seen in the past as a highly respected, vital and integral part of a democratic society, nowadays journalist all over the world are openly blamed rightly or wrongly, for what is going wrong. If the British journalist Nick Davies is right in his recent book, Flat Earth News, that even quality newspapers in some cases have bribed the police to get first-hand information, we should be ashamed of ourselves.

The traditional journalistic organizations, still focusing on their merits of the past, are not structured to cope with this dramatic change. That is why a new approach is urgently needed.

Not by government, not by other organizations or institutions, but by journalism itself.

Self-regulation is the only way to maintain the independent stance of the news media and to regain the respectability and credibility of journalism in this digital age.

Of course, there are already self-regulating mechanisms in place in The Netherlands. Many Dutch newspapers do have their own editorial code. For almost 50 years an independent press complaints commission, called Council for Journalism, is actually trying to regulate the press. But just like the PCC in the UK, the council is toothless because it does not have any sanctions, its regulations being based on voluntary compliance.

In view of the rising criticism in society, we have to acknowledge that the existing mechanisms do not work sufficiently anymore. And it is fully understandable that government and society as a whole are asking the journalistic profession questions about transparency, about professional codes, about self-regulation and about accountability.

The Media-ombudsman The Netherlands has chosen a different way of self-regulation than other organizations have done in the past. It goes without saying that our foundation is a fully independent journalistic organization. It is nonpartisan, nonpolitical and nonideological. The ruling body of the foundation is the executive board, made up exclusively of professional journalists.

First and foremost, we want to raise the existing standards of media ethics and deontology and, if necessary, introduce new standards. In this way we hope to bring back awareness among the journalistic profession, awareness for the highly responsible role journalism has to play in a democratic society. It is not an easy task because journalists are not used to being criticized from within their own ranks. As the English say, “Dog does not eat dog.” But in our view the task has to be carried out, primarily to keep the government at bay and at the same time trying to regain respect from society for the news media.

Our approach is to follow a two-way track:

1. As an ombudsman speaking out in public on fundamental issues of ethics in journalism, for instance on issues like protecting citizens’ privacy, renewal of codes of conduct, desirability and feasibility of an Internet code, how to prevent news hypes, how to fight against eavesdropping, whether embedded journalism is an accepted press activity, whether we should apply new standards for civil journalism, manipulation of photos and images, whether the notion of free speech is still alive, etc.

2. Instigating scientific research on issues of media ethics, cooperating with academics of the different Dutch universities specialized in ethical issues. At our request the University of Amsterdam has started an ambitious scholarly research project into the journalistic codes of conduct, including the feasibility of an Internet code. Fontys University of Applied Sciences, in close cooperation with our foundation, is looking into the role of media ombudsmen. In our view, the ombudsman is one of the best mechanisms of self-regulation and accountability, specifically in times when journalism has become a profession under fire. The ombudsman may be an answer to an increasingly critical, yet at the same time disengaged, readership.

In the autumn of this year, we hope to publish the results of this research, making them the subject of talks with the journalistic profession, especially with the ombuddies. Of course it will be our pleasure to share the outcome of the research with ONO. We know, as we have just heard from Dr. Cristina Elia, there has been research in the past into the work of media ombudsmen, carried out, for instance, by the European Journalism Observatory. Instead the research we are undertaking focuses specifically on the real impact of ombudsmen as far as self-regulation and accountability is concerned. We are looking at the different types of ombudsmen (public editor, readers’ representative, newspaper ambassador or real ombudsman), their ombudsman statute, their duties and responsibilities, their independent stance, their accountability. For defining the impact of their work, we are scrutinizing hundreds of columns of different types of ombudsmen. We strongly hope and believe that the outcome of this scholarly quest will reaffirm the media ombudsmen as one of the most effective mechanisms of self-regulation and accountability in the media world.

Part of our research is a questionnaire. I have brought printed copies with me which I shall hand out later. I hope you will answer the questions as carefully as you can. My colleague Kees Haak and I are happy to inform you in detail during the days ahead about the Media-ombudsmen The Netherlands.

Thank you.