The Press and Political Power: A Historical and Ethical Analysis
The Press and Political Power
The public sphere in 18th-century England was closely linked to cafes and clubs. The arts (theater, literature, painting) began to separate from aristocratic patrons, with some relying on publishers. Media became increasingly diverse and specialized.
Moral publications in England, particularly periodicals addressing female audiences and private morality, gained popularity. These publications led to the emergence of others focused on political opinion. The connection between political power, public opinion, and the press was deeply rooted in England, especially after the removal of prior censorship in 1695. The British developed numerous publications, including Gazetas, which addressed the policies of various political factions, including conservatives and liberals.
The media reflected economic (especially with the rise of the Industrial Age) and cultural perspectives. The press became institutionalized in the UK, with the English Parliament even incorporating press galleries into its newly built structures.
The term “public opinion” as we understand it today emerged in the 19th century. After 1880, news agencies revolutionized global communication. In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, mass media developed in the US and Europe, with sensationalism gaining prominence.
Media outlets became characterized by fixed assets and consumption patterns, transforming into powerful instruments of societal influence (e.g., Watergate). Influential media groups became partners in power, capable of manipulation. A parallel press emerged, offering more serious and documented content for social elites.
After World War I, the victors believed the press should fulfill a public service, exemplified by the BBC. This highlighted the media’s power and influence, emphasizing journalistic independence and ethics.
The post-World War II era (1945-1970) saw economic expansion that impacted the information system. Democracies defended freedom of expression while also implementing control standards for certain media due to technological advancements. Both public and private initiatives increased, leading to media outlets gaining more power.
During the 1980s and 1990s, the concentration of media groups was favored, despite antitrust laws in many states. This laid the groundwork for many of the media landscapes we see today.
Political Journalism
Political journalism is challenging due to numerous pressures. Maintaining independence is difficult, as is achieving objectivity.
In democracies, the link between public opinion, liberal parliamentary systems, and the media is undeniable.
German sociologist Jürgen Habermas, in his 1962 book The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere, studied the formation of public opinion. He argued that economic and cultural transformations enabled the development of modern democracy. Public opinion emerged in 18th-century England, fostering a critical audience that sought participation in social and political regulation. The free press played a crucial role in this development, facilitating public engagement in political and social debates.
Freedom of the press is fundamental to democratic systems. The US Constitution’s First Amendment guarantees freedom of expression, and both the US and Britain were pioneers in considering the press as the “fourth estate.”
In 1947, the Hutchins Commission in the US established a distinction between press freedom and social responsibility. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) began regulating the press based on fairness, balance, and diversity. The FCC recognized the state’s role in ensuring news quality if the press failed to do so. These values became mandatory for the press and essential for a functioning democracy.
Similar committees in Britain and Sweden reached similar conclusions about the social responsibility of the press, advocating for monopoly control and citizen complaint mechanisms.
Today, most European countries have press councils or similar bodies to ensure ethical journalism.
Spain has lacked effective press control committees. Existing ones are considered overly interventionist (e.g., Catalan and Galician). Journalistic control is primarily handled through the judiciary. Some experts advocate for a body to regulate journalism. Negotiations have resulted in ethical principles and codes of conduct (FAPE, 1993) and style guides. However, these are considered insufficient to define a clear framework of acceptable and unacceptable practices.
These instruments, along with laws and jurisprudence concerning information, freedom of expression, and fundamental rights, have created ambiguity regarding journalistic ethics. Concepts like accuracy, impartiality, and objectivity remain central.
Political journalism faces two major challenges:
- Facilitating a public forum for democratic debate.
- Helping readers understand complex social realities to become active citizens and informed voters.
Three core ethical values can guide these challenges:
- Truth: Communicating factual reality.
- Independence: Closely linked to freedom. An independent journalist avoids becoming a mouthpiece for political authorities or personal biases.
- Accountability: Related to journalism’s social function and the journalist’s role in strengthening democracy and the common good.
The media have an obligation to provide accurate, impartial, and objective information because the public expects it. This expectation grants the media significant power to shape public opinion.
Birth of Public Opinion in Spain
Public opinion in Spain emerged in the 19th century and gained prominence in the 20th, coinciding with the rise of the bourgeoisie. The 18th-century Spanish press had limited national relevance, focusing on regional coverage (Catalan, Valencian, Andalusian, Madrid) with few resources.
In 1780, non-official publications were banned, with restrictions easing in 1792. The political press flourished in the early 19th century.
The press adopted a utilitarian and didactic approach, gradually incorporating political elements. Its role in disseminating information was crucial. During the reign of Ferdinand VII, the press helped create public opinion and contributed to developing democratic institutions. 1811 marked a turning point with the recognition of freedom of expression in some countries. In 1834, liberal exiles returned to Spain, bringing with them Romantic ideas and new journalistic practices from England. By 1835, newspapers began to include political, cultural, and scientific content alongside news.
In 1868, newspapers aligned with specific political parties emerged. Their content became more engaging, incorporating literary criticism, hobbies, humor, and advertising.
In the late 19th century, high illiteracy rates limited newspaper circulation. However, newspapers enjoyed wide diffusion through the practice of reading aloud in casinos, cafes, and social gatherings.
Some of Spain’s oldest surviving newspapers include Diario de Catalunya, La Vanguardia, and ABC. The 20th-century Spanish press was characterized by company ownership, with publications serving as financing tools. This era can be considered the age of mass press. After the transition to democracy, the press experienced a boom with diverse publications, but it is currently in decline.
Article 20 of the Spanish Constitution guarantees the right to receive truthful information. The Constitutional Court (61/1988) acknowledges that inaccuracies are inevitable in free debate and that requiring absolute truth would stifle freedom of information. The right to truthful information places a responsibility on the public to critically evaluate information. The Spanish legal framework encourages consulting multiple news sources, but this is not always practiced.
This doctrine doesn’t explicitly require journalists to present all versions of a story for complete information. However, various newspaper groups’ Codes of Ethics do. For example, Vocento’s code states that when information involves opposing positions, all should be presented impartially, without the newspaper implicitly supporting any side. The newspaper can take a stance, but only on opinion pages. Vocento’s style guide (1.2.8) explicitly mandates separating opinion from information.
The FAPE Code of Ethics (1.3) states that journalists should verify information, including contrasting sources and allowing those involved to offer their perspective. Paragraph 17 states that journalists should clearly distinguish between facts, opinions, interpretations, and conjectures, but neutrality is not mandatory in all situations.
These guidelines aim to prevent bias. Contrasting sources ensures balanced information, and separating opinion from information allows media outlets to have an editorial line while reporting impartially.
Legal action is the primary recourse against unethical journalism.
Bias and the blurring of opinion and information can be harmful, particularly when violating the presumption of innocence (e.g., parallel trials). FAPE’s Code of Ethics (paragraph 5) states that journalists must assume innocence until proven guilty and avoid causing harm through their reporting, especially in legal matters.
This principle is based on Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (1950), which allows for restricting freedom of expression to protect the reputation or rights of others, prevent the disclosure of confidential information, or maintain the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
Article 7.4 of the Spanish Criminal Code (1995) condemns actions or expressions that injure another person’s dignity, reputation, or self-esteem.
Defamation, including insults, is a crime in Spain. A journalist can be found liable for defamation if their reporting is derogatory, regardless of the public figure status of the individual or the veracity of the report. This is outlined in a Constitutional Court ruling (October 22, 1987).
A free, balanced, and responsible press is essential for a healthy democracy and guarantees the right to truthful information enshrined in the Spanish Constitution.
Spain lacks a body to ensure press balance and accountability, leaving the judiciary as the primary authority to address journalistic violations.
During legal proceedings, press coverage should respect the presumption of innocence, the right to privacy, and the right to honor.
The journalist’s role in the political process can be summarized as:
- Providing citizens with sufficient information for informed voting.
- Monitoring the transparency of electoral processes and institutions.
Objectivity and Interpretation
Objectivity in journalism has been defined as a method of discourse. It has been a constant topic of debate, often constraining and distorting news reporting. While objectivity might be achievable in experimental sciences, it’s an illusion in social sciences and communication. Journalists are expected to be objective and truthful, often equated with neutrality. This simplistic view equates objectivity with accurately representing reality. However, the information process is complex, and facts are not the sole protagonists. While news should report facts, other genres prioritize how facts are presented. Several concepts related to objectivity require further consideration:
- Fairness: Lack of bias for or against something or someone. Impartiality can be achieved by avoiding taking sides. However, fairness alone doesn’t guarantee objectivity, as it also requires critical thinking, balance, and restraint.
- Independence: Freedom from all influences (political, economic, social, cultural). Independence allows journalists to exercise objectivity, but it’s not definitive. Paradoxically, journalists sometimes use their freedom to defend their own biases.
- Neutrality: Refraining from taking action or expressing an opinion. Neutrality is possible but not always desirable. It’s crucial during election campaigns to avoid influencing voters. However, even public media outlets might prioritize certain issues over others, making information selection inherently discriminatory.
- Rigor: Accuracy, precision, and conciseness. Rigor emphasizes the discourse and the journalist’s attitude towards the narrative.
Journalism aims to make topics interesting, even those that might not initially appeal to readers. Despite limited reader interest, the media often prioritizes politics, leading to fatigue and disengagement.
Journalists are not disinterested individuals and shouldn’t be expected to be entirely neutral. However, they should strive for independence and impartiality, working with rigor and precision.
This leads to a more nuanced understanding of objectivity. Being objective means interpreting reality with rigor and responsibility. Interpretation involves understanding, clarifying, explaining, and even unmasking, especially in political journalism.
Interpretation is not synonymous with opinion or judgment. It also involves selecting, researching, relating, contextualizing, analyzing, explaining, and evaluating. These functions can and should be performed rigorously and responsibly.
There’s an ongoing debate about the media’s power and limitations, fueled by distrust, fear, and power struggles. The information space is a public space where everyone belongs.
Journalistic discourse should be analyzed as both a narrative and an interpretation – a creative yet rigorous process, not solely a scientific pursuit of unattainable objectivity. When readers and journalists engage in a shared interpretation of facts, there’s less chance of deception or manipulation.
Ideology and Values
The expectation that journalists should be mere transmitters of information is flawed. They shouldn’t remain on the surface, acting as intermediaries relaying information without understanding its context and consequences.
Journalism requires specific attitudes, skills, methods, and patterns of action to understand and communicate reality. These can be summarized as: a realistic sense, a critical sense, a documented sense, a rhetorical sense, and a teleological sense.
When media become subservient, they transform into propaganda tools. When journalists uncritically relay government pronouncements without context or evaluation, they risk manipulation and biased reporting.
Journalism should be critical of an objectivist and servile approach that can be manipulated by sources and companies, contributing to the dissemination of stereotypes and prejudices. The alternative is documented and explanatory journalism that provides all necessary elements for the audience to understand the communicated reality.
The media’s role in a pluralistic democracy is a complex issue. Can media outlets have their own ideologies? Can they express support for or against political programs or parties? If so, does this compromise objectivity, accuracy, or credibility?
The relationship between the press and political power is inherently conflicting. In a democracy, the media acts as a watchdog with a fundamental political dimension. It can be an agent of social change or a tool for maintaining the status quo. This power can be misused for propaganda, making the media a potent instrument for disseminating biased information.
Propaganda is defined as the attempt to influence public opinion and behavior. It’s a technique based on psychological and sociological principles, aiming to provoke action rather than simply changing opinions.
The term “propaganda” carries negative connotations. Media outlets can become its primary instruments, employing effective dissemination rules: simplification (single enemy), exaggeration and distortion, orchestration, unanimity, and contagion. Counter-propaganda employs similar tactics: identifying the enemy, attacking weaknesses, avoiding direct confrontation, using scorn and ridicule, and highlighting contradictions. Today, it’s challenging to distinguish between propaganda and counter-propaganda, as both utilize similar appeals.
Propaganda is an invasive method for disseminating ideas and opinions that contribute to misinformation. Its sources include advertising, political ideology, and journalism, particularly political journalism. Propaganda relies on lies, distortion, and omission.
Propaganda can lead to the colonization of consciousness and manipulation, ultimately resulting in alienation and a lack of critical thinking within society.
The ideal of objective journalism is unattainable, while militant journalism becomes a propaganda tool. Media outlets and journalists are political actors whose influence shapes public opinion. They can act as a shadow government, exercising critical power and holding those in power accountable. However, this power is not unlimited; freedom of expression has its boundaries.
The media should enjoy the same freedoms as any individual or community, as guaranteed by Article 16.1 of the Spanish Constitution, which protects freedom of ideology, religion, and worship, with limitations only for maintaining public order. No one should be forced to declare their ideology, religion, or beliefs.
The guiding principles for media content should be clearly defined, leading to transparent reading agreements.
The press must remain independent from government influence and coercion. Independence is a core value, not an ideology. However, claims of independence can be used to mask hidden agendas. Manipulation occurs when media outlets pretend to be something they are not.
Press associations and journalism schools emphasize the need to separate information from opinion, as reflected in codes of ethics. In opinion pieces, the author’s ideological perspective is explicitly or implicitly acknowledged. However, in informational texts, questions arise: Can events be perceived without bias? Can facts be presented in a completely objective and fixed structure? Media outlets with a specific ideological slant can be problematic for those who disagree. Ultimately, it’s crucial for media to adhere to editorial principles and guidelines without these significantly impacting other sections of their content.