Week 9: Chequebook Journalism

Beaconsfield miners, Lleyton and Bec's wedding and baby photos, party brat Corey Worthington, Simone Warne, Bob and Blanche and the list goes on and on and on....

Chequebook journalism is the act of journalists paying for information. Although not necessarily condemned, it is frowned upon and questioned as an unethical practice in journalism. The Media Entertainment Arts Alliance AJA Code of Ethics does not state that this should not be performed, but incidences of when it does happen should be disclosed.

So where does this stigma of unethical behaviour stem from? It is seen as devaluing the journalism profession to a contest about who has the deepest pockets. It defies the the grand (and perhaps mythical)perception of a journalist digging deep to access a hot lead through hard work and sheer determination to provide truth and justice for the public. Media organisations risk losing rtheir reputation by employing what is viewed as a dishonourable newsroom tactic.

One argument in favour of chequebook journalism surrounds the capitalist natue of the media; if people want to tell their story, the media is often willing to buy it. Similarly without chequebook journalism, in the modern day, many potential stories may be lost where journalists do not have the time or resources to dig deep for a story. In this sense chequebook journalism may be encouraging greater disclosure to the public.

This is not to say chequebook journalism is an honorable practice. One of the concerns with it is that paid persons may feel obliged to inflate or dramatise their story to ensure news outlets are getting bang for their buck.

Without question, it crosses the line when media corporations use their power to impede on other areas, particularly the law. Rumours have been rife that 60 Minutes was footing the bill for Schapelle Corby's trial for things like forensic tersting and expert witnesses. In 2005, Mediawatch reported that Channel Nine has avoided reporting stories unfavourable to Corby: "ACA and 60 Minutes have deliberately steered away from any anti Corby stories They don't want to do anything that will blow their access ...it's embarrassing." When journalists meddle in the legal system (i.e. forensic tests/expert witnesses) perhaps there is a conflict of interest. Journlaists are supposed to strive for objectivity in reporting, not actually contribute to events unfolding. When they develop a financial interest in the ways the news pans out chequebook journalism becomes an immensely unethical practice.