Who needs a code of ethics? : the role of the code of ethics of Lithuanian journalists and publishers in the Lithuanian media ethics evolution cby Rytis Juozapavicius

Abstract

This thesis investigates how an introduction of The Code of Ethics of Lithuanian Journalists affects and is affected by the social changes in Lithuania. After the break away from the Soviet Empire the Lithuanian society is undergoing rapid process of democratisation. As the media take an active role in it, their ethical performance appears to be hard to control. In 1996 the adoption of the code by the professional community was followed by legislation that made the code law-enforced, but gave the power to sanction violations of media ethics to the media self-regulation system. This, in all essence, took control of all media ethics away from Government. I have argued that this was the result of conscious strategies of media lobbyists, because it was in fact a deregulation of political media control. However, some media practitioners apparently interpreted the transfer of control to the media representatives as an invitation to unrestrained journalism.

At the present day Lithuanian media exercise their power as the Fourth Estate widely as never before, but their professional standards are quite different from the western media norms. Professional conduct does not meet the requirements of the code and the progress of it is too sluggish. I try to prove that the code and media self-regulation system does not help to make media more accountable to the public in spite of all sound arguments of self-regulation protagonists about their great value. Media accountability is not in harmony with media freedom.

Drawing on Habermasian critical theory of the public sphere I imply that with the introduction of the legally entrenched code and media self-regulation system the media power was multiplied in the public discourse. Now the Lithuanian media have lots of possibilities to manipulate while mediating in the public discourse and there are too few means to detain them from drifting into malpractice.