Responsible Journalism

As Canada changes its libel laws to focus on ‘responsible journalism’ (see previous post) over on the other side of the Atlantic a different argument about the responsibility of journalists is raging.

Two cousins of Akmal Shaikh, the British man executed by the Chinese on 29 December for smuggling heroin, have accused the British media of failing their cousin. Amina and Ridwan Shaikh wrote a letter to The Guardian stating that the “sporadic media attention” that his case received during his two years in prison contributed to his execution.

They stated:

We were shocked that, apart from Sky News, his case received only sporadic media attention during his two years in prison. Only when news was released of his imminent execution did it get the coverage it deserved. Wouldn’t more media attention at an earlier stage have applied more pressure to the Chinese authorities? Wasn’t this lack of coverage an injustice in itself?

But is Shaikh’s eventual death the responsibility of the media? And, as Amy Stillman wrote in her blog post, Did the media fail Akmal Shaikh?, “should the press function as an international pressure cooker” for cases such as Shaikh’s?

The Shaikh’s are confusing the role of advocacy groups, such as Reprieve, and the media. For the media to maintain its integrity, and by extension its role within any functioning democracy, it cannot start agenda bashing. The responsibility of journalists needs to be maintaining this integrity, not championing causes. The one would destroy the other.