M*A*S

MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Foreword
Freedom of expression and freedom of the media
are among fundamental rights at the core of a democracy.
Establishing a legal framework and setting ethical standards for the profession are critical to ensure that independent, pluralistic and responsible media can develop
without being subject to undue interferences or hardship.
In Serbia and in any democracy, a free press is in everyones interest.
The OSCE Mission to Serbia has been assisting all
interested and competent parties in the media field to face
the challenges to achieve best standards and practices.
These challenges are not over and never will be, here or
anywhere. The industry is evolving constantly and new
ethical issues arise as the world changes.
Yet the imperative of applying high professional
standards remains. Ethics does matter. Ethics posits principles and rules, which need to respected. Hence, the
concept of non-governmental accountability mechanisms presented by Professor Claude-Jean Bertrand in
this booklet. They should be part of the solution, as they
aim at engaging media, journalists and society in a
constant and fruitful dialogue.
Ambassador Hans Ola Urstad
Head of OSCE Mission to Serbia
3

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Claude-Jean Bertrand
Professor emeritus
at the Institut Franais de Presse
University of Paris-2

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY
SYSTEMS
The basic idea is that both the freedom and the
regulation are indispensable if we want news media to
provide the public with the service needed for democracy. BUT they are not enough and they can be dangerous.
Ethics is indispensable too, including media accountability systems, M*A*S. , non-governmental means of
inducing media and journalists to respect the rules set by
the profession:
The purpose of the M*A*S is triple
1. To help journalists serve the public better,
2. To help journalists form a profession, feel solidarity among themselves,
3. To help them recover public trust and thus public support to resist political and economic pressure.
5

It is not usual to gather such different items into

one concept. It is justified because they all share a basic
feature: they all aim at improving the news services that
media supply to the public and most enable media to
listen to the public.
Now let us have a look at some VIRTUES that
M*A*S possess which explains why they deserve attention.
1. M*A*S are harmless.
2. M*A*S are diverse. They can be documents:
texts or broadcasts, or people (individuals or
groups) or processes (fast or slow). They can be
internal to media, or external to them, or they
involve co-operation of media people and nonmedia people. Besides, one may distinguish
between M*A*S that function at local or regional or national or international level or even at
all four levels (like press councils). Or again
between those that produce an effect that is
immediate, or short term or long term.
3. M*A*S are flexible. They can easily be adapted
to circumstances.
4. They complement each other. While none is sufficient, all are useful. And they can all function
with one another.
5. They are democratic. With very few exceptions,
they are all initiated by the profession or by the
public (not by the State).
6

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

6. They are efficient. If only because they can operate where other means of influence prove powerless. For instance, the law or market forces cannot do much about the flaws in the journalistic
tradition.
With such virtues, why then M*A*S so little
accepted, so little used? For one thing, they are not
known. And if known, they are disliked simply because
they are new.
Generally speaking, what are the ACCUSATIONS
brought against them?
1. That M*A*S belong with public relations. If that
is so, then why are media decision makers hostile to them?
2. That they are part of a conspiracy against freedom of expression and free enterprise: governments will use them to censor the news media.
That has never happened.
3. That they are unacceptable by journalists, on
principle. According to the code of the
International Federation of Journalists (1954),
the journalist recognizes, in professional matters, the jurisdiction of his colleagues only; he
excludes every kind of interference by governments or others. These days, journalists need
others.
4. That M*A*S are inefficient: good media do not
need quality control; the bad ones will never
accept it unless the Law forces it upon them.
7

5. Real power is in the hands of media owners: for

them sales are enough to evaluate public satisfaction. If the public is truly angry, let them go to
court. Journalists cannot afford to antagonize
their employers by insisting on respect of ethical
rules. As for the public, it is heterogeneous,
unorganized. It believes that it is powerless. It
does not have the time, the competence, the
motivation to get involved.
6. Some M*A*S are costly, if they are to do their
job well, meaning quickly and visibly. And it is
better not to ask the State for funds, journalists
do not have money to spare and media owners
are reluctant to pay.
7. Last, most valid, objection: M*A*S do not aim
at the right targets. Journalists commit minor
sins and media companies commit mortal sins.
Yet, traditionally, media ethics focuses on journalists, who are thus turned into scapegoats.
That last argument has led me to believe that media
ethics is not just about making media ethical, but about
making journalists independent thanks to the support of
the general public.
The resistance and obstacles to M*A*S are such
that, if you look around on the media landscape, you may
see very few and decide that they have failed to get a
foothold.
8

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

ACTUALLY many M*A*S have become such a

normal part of the environment that they are not noticed
anymore, especially the less spectacular, the less controversial M*A*S, like codes of ethics, critical books, university level training for journalists, correction boxes,
regular newspaper pages devoted to the media, readership
surveys, etc.
In their fight for independence, journalists cannot
expect much support from media owners or from legislators. So, since they are relatively few in number and are
merely employees of a company, the only way for them
to be autonomous is to make an ally of the public, to join
forces with the masses.
M*A*S are extremely diverse but all aim at
improving news media, using evaluation, monitoring,
education, feedback and communication. Here is a
list of over 110, but more can, and will, be invented
(see www.media-accountability.org).
The most obvious classification of the M*A*S is
into three groups according to their intrinsic nature:
documents (printed or broadcast) / people (individuals or groups) / processes (long or short).

Text, Broadcast or Website

A written code of ethics, or an ethics handbook,
listing rules which media professionals have discussed
and/or agreed upon with, preferably, input by the public.
And which should be made known to the public.
An internal memo reminding the staff of ethical
principles (maybe the tradition of the paper1) and providing it with guidelines as to behavior in particular circumstances.
A daily internal self-criticism report circulated in
the newsroom.2
A correction box, or column3, published, very visibly. Or time taken to correct an error on the air.
A regular Letters to the Editor column/program, including messages critical of the newspaper/ magazine/ station.
An accuracy-and-fairness questionnaire, mailed
to persons mentioned in the news or published for any
reader to fill out.
1

10

To its Standards & Ethics code, the Washington Post appends

Eugene Meyers (its former owner) 1933 Principles.

Like at Zero Hora, a daily of Porto Alegre in Brazil.

As in The Guardian, the British quality daily.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

A public statement about media by some eminent

decision-maker, abundantly quoted in the news 4.
A space or time slot purchased by an individual,
a group or a company to publish an open letter about
some media issue 5.
An occasional Letter from the editor, expounding values and rules, or explaining how media function.
A sidebar explaining some difficult editorial decision to publish or not to publish.
An Editors blog by senior staff to explain operations and decisions; also to take the reader/viewer
behind the scenes and respond to his/her remarks.6
A newsletter to readers, inserted or mailed, to
keep them informed of what goes on at the newspaper or
station.
A regular media column, page, section7 in a newspaper, newsmagazine, trade review or a program on
radio or television, that does more than just mention new
appointments and ownership changes.
4

A huge ballyhoo greeted US Vice-President Spiro Agnews two

1969 speeches against liberal media.

Like the one against toxic popular culture published in newspapers all over the US by 56 eminent Americans in July 1999.

As initiated in 2005 by the CBS network and the New York

Times.

Like the Media Guardian within the Monday edition of the

Guardian (London).
11

 A regular ethics column in a trade magazine.8

Regular reports by media-oriented citizens associations that are published by newspapers.
A daily online clearing house carrying info on
events in the media world, quotes and criticism.9
A web site systematically posting corrections of
media errors, 10
or the grievances of working journalists11,
or abuses by advertisers.12
A website offering journalists information and
advice on promoting accountability.13
A website devoted to debate on media issues (e.g.
media and the children).
A section of a newspapers web site devoted to
immediate feedback by readers to a particular article.14

12

As the monthly Ethics Corner in Editor & Publisher since

1999.

Like the Romenesko column since 1998, on the Poynter

Institute website.

10

Like www.slipup.com in the US.

11

Like, in the US, the News Mait site maintained by Maurice

Tamman for 3 years until 1999.

12

Like www.adbusters.org in Vancouver, run by former Madison

Avenue types.

13

Like the IFJ (International Federation of Journalists) website

for African news people: www.ifj.org/regions/africa.

14

The online edition of the French daily Le Monde actively

solicits such feedback. Also BBC News Online.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

A website teaching the public how to evaluate

media.15
A satirical presentation of the news implicitly
exposing the failings of regular TV newscasts.16
An online newspaper whose material is entirely
supplied by citizens.17 Or readers blogs within a newspapers site to cover neighborhood news and issues. A printed newspaper can also make good use of readers input.18
An alternative periodical (esp. published by a
minority), non-profit station or website, that publishes
facts and gives viewpoints which regular media ignore,
including criticism of the said media.
A journalism review, on paper or the air or the
Web19, devoted principally to media criticism, exposing
what media have distorted or omitted, and whatever other
sins reporters or media companies have committed .

15

Like John McManus San Francisco Bay Area website focussed

on television news: www.gradethenews.org

16

Like Jon Stewarts Daily Show on Comedy Central (USA),

very popular with young viewers.

17

Like Ohmy News in South Korea which uses thousands of

amateur reporters and scores 2 million page-views a day.
Similar is Scoop.co in Israel.

18

Two pages in the Spanish daily El Correo. The French

Dpche du midi has thus widened its staff to several thousands.

19

Like the American JR (University of Maryland) or the On-Line

JR (U. of Southern California).
13

 Darts and Laurels, a page or website consisting

of short stories in criticism or praise of some media
action, such as most journalism reviews have had.20
Guides to media empowerment i.e. getting
involved in media policy.21
An annual report by a newspaper presenting a
social and ethical audit of its contents and services, based
on the opinions of thousands of readers.22
Publication on the Web of full transcriptions of
interviews and emails by news sources angered by bias or
distortion.
A petition signed by hundreds or thousands to put
pressure on media directly or via advertisers or via some
regulatory agency.
A yearbook of journalism criticism, written by
reporters and media users, edited by academics.23
A weblog run by a journalist, or by an amateur,
that scrutinize mainstream media, critiquing what they
say and dont say.24

14

20

See also the internal bulletin circulated by the New York Times,
called Winners and Sinners.

21

Like that produced in the US for the Consumers Union. Or a

book by anti-dysinformation militants on how to access the
columns of Le Monde.

22

As the British Guardian and Observer have done since 2003. In

Sweden, a similar audit is produced by the University of
Gteborg and an association of publishers.

23

Like the one put out by the University of Tampere, in Finland,

after an annual seminar on the topic.

24

Like university-based Media Lens in the UK correcting the

distorted vision of corporate media.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

An article, report, book, film, TV series about

media, informative about media and, to some extent at
least, critical.
Newsletters emailed to subscribers by mediawatch organizations.25
The review of a consumer group (regional or
national) which occasionally deals with media.
A website showing how foreign media report on
your country , with translation of stories.26
A television network27 or weekly newsmagazine28
entirely made up of material borrowed from foreign
media, enabling users to evaluate their own media.
A non-profit regular daily newspaper, immune
from share-holder and advertiser pressure.29
(Very exceptional) A newspaper given by its publisher to a journalism school to serve as a teaching hospital.30
25

Like FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) or Project

Censored in the US.

26

Like Watching America in the US, with articles and audio and
video clips.

27

Like SBS in Australia.

28

Like Courrier International in France.

29

Like the St Petersburg Times (Florida) whose profits go to the

excellent Poynter Institute.

30

The Anniston Star, whose assets were given in 2003 to a foundation that will join the University of Alabama in running a
community journalism program.
15

Individuals or groups
An in-house critic, or a contents evaluation commission 31, to scrutinize the newspaper, or monitor the
station, for breaches of the code without making their
findings public.
An ethics committee or a staff review group (a
rotating panel of journalists) set up to discuss and/or
decide ethical issues, preferably before they occur.
An ethics coach operating in the newsroom, occasionally, to raise the reporters ethical awareness, to
encourage debate and advise on specific problems.
A media reporter assigned to keep watch on the
media industry and give the public full, unprejudiced
reports 32.
An outside critic paid by a newspaper to write a
regular column about the paper.
A whistle-blower who dares to denounce some
abuse within the media company.

16

31

Like the shinsa-shitsu set up by Japanese dailies as early as the

1920s.

32

The best-known, David Shaw (of The Los Angeles Times) was
awarded a Pulitzer prize in 1991.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

A consumer reporter who warns readers/viewers

against misleading advertising and intervenes on their
behalf.33
An ombudsman, editor in charge of reader relations, or a team of reporters, employed by a newspaper
or station, to listen to suggestions and complaints from
customers, investigate, obtain redress if need be and (usually) report on his activities.
A Complaints bureau or Customer service unit to
listen to grievances and requests.34
A disciplinary committee set up by a union or
other professional association to obtain that its code be
respected under pain of expulsion.
Unions of journalists have shown everywhere a
keen interest in media ethics, drafted codes and initiated
press councils.
A watchdogs watchdog, monitoring established
M*A*S.35
A liaison committee set up jointly by media and a
social group with which they may occasionally clash 36.
33

Like the Action Line teams common in US newspapers in the

1970s.

34

Like that of the BBC in Britain.

35

Like the FPS association in Germany watching over the press

council and other M*A*S.

36

Like the police or some immigrant minority.

17

 A citizen appointed to the editorial board; or several (often chosen among users who have complained)
invited to attend the daily news meeting.
A panel (or several specialized panels) of readers/
listeners/ viewers regularly consulted37 a Readers
Advisory Committee to serve as the eyes and ears of the
newspaper in their communities.38
A club (of readers / listeners / viewers) that uses
perks to attract members and leads them into a dialogue
about the medium (most often a magazine).
A radio club, to listen together and debate issues,
to provide local news and suggestions to the regional
broadcaster which supplies equipment and training.39
A local press council, i.e. regular meetings of
some professionals from the local media and representative members of the community.
A national (or regional) press council set up by
the professional associations of media owners and of
journalists, and normally including representatives of the
public to speak up for press freedom and to field complaints from media users.
37

18

In Mexico, the Reforma group of newspapers uses 60 reader

boards assigned to various fields. In Argentina, La Nacion has
1500 readers it consults twice a month.

38

Such as the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel uses.

39

Common in sub-Saharan Africa, e.g. in Burkina, Benin, Niger,

and Congo.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

A national ombudsman appointed by the press to

deal with complaints, either in association with a press
council (Sweden) or independent (South Africa).
A watchdog agency set up by a media-related
industry (like advertising) to filter contents and ask that
some not be made public, for ethical reasons 40.
A militant association dedicated to media reform41
or to helping persons with grievances against media 42.
Media observatories set up by journalists to
monitor attacks on press freedom and adherence to a
code, receive complaints, debate ethical issues with publishers.
An single-issue federation of many kinds of
NGOs (civil rights groups, labour unions, consumer associations etc.) to fight a battle for better media.43
A foundation that funds projects or institutions
aiming at the improvement of media. 44
40

Like the BVP (Bureau de vrification de la publicit) in France

or the Advertising Standards Authority in Britain.

41

Like FAIR in the US (www.fair.org) .

42

Like PressWise in Britain (www.presswise.org.uk)

43

Such a federation in the US in 2004 obtained from Congress

that some media deregulation be nullified.

44

Like the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and the FriedrichNaumann Foundation in Germany or the Pew Charitable Trusts
in the US.
19

 A media-related institution, national45 or international, that has a direct or indirect interest in promoting
media quality 46 through conferences, seminars, publications etc.
A combination M*A*S like the Poynter
Institute in Florida, involved in research, data-gathering,
publication, training, advice
A national or international NGO to militate on
behalf of journalists freedom and welfare.47
An NGO that trains personnel, and provides free
services to media, in emerging democracies (Eastern
Europe) and under-developed nations.
An NGO that organizes regular public debates or
campaigns on media issues. 48
A citizen group (like a labor union or a parents
association) which, for partisan and/or public interest
reasons (e.g. the welfare of children49), monitors the
media or attacks a special target, like advertising50.

20

45

Like the AEJMC (Association of Educators in Journalism and

Mass Communication) in the US.

46

Like the International Press Institute or the World Association

of Newspapers.

47

Like RSF, Reporters Sans Frontires or the US Committee of

Concerned Journalists.

48

To be found in the UK (MediaWatch) or the Czech Republic.

49

Like ANDI in Brasilia which monitors Brazilian media, and

reports on how they deal with children.

50

Like Rsistance lagression publicitaire in France.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

A consumers association, especially one of

media users, using awareness sessions, monitoring, opinion polls, evaluations, lobbying, mail campaigns, even
boycotts to obtain better service.51
A commission set up by Parliament52 but independent, in order thoroughly to study a major media
issue, like concentration of ownership.
A team assigned by a social group (women, ethnic minority, physicians etc.) to monitor the media coverage they are receiving.
A representative group of journalists in the newsroom, endowed with some rights, as allowed by law in
Germany or required in Portugal.
An Order of journalists, statutory but totally independent, one of whose purposes is to formulate and
enforce ethical rules.53
An association of publishers and editors to debate
issues and promote quality.54
51

Like the Spanish FIATYR, a federation of associations of media

users in every province or People For Better TV, a US broadbased national coalition.

52

Called Royal Commission in the UK and Australia.

53

Likle the Ordine dei Giornalisti in Italy.

54

Like the Verein fr Qualitt in Journalismus in German-speaking

countries.

21

 A team formed by a group of specialized journalists (investigative reporters, women etc.) to exchange
information and promote their interests.
A socit de rdacteurs, an association of all
newsroom staff, that demands a voice in editorial policy
and preferably owns shares in the company so as to
make itself heard.55
A socit de lecteurs, an association of readers
which buys, or is given, shares in the capital of a media
company and demands to have a say.56
It seems reasonable also to place in this category
three types of institutions that some experts would leave
out of the M*A*S concept. Provided they do not take
orders from government, to the extent that their purpose
is to improve media service, it does not seem possible to
leave them out completely. They might be called associate M*A*S or para-M*A*S:
The regulatory agency, set up by law, provided it
is truly independent, especially if it takes complaints from
media users.57

22

55

The first was set up at the French daily Le Monde (1951).

56

As is the case at Le Monde , of which it owns about 11%.

57

Like the Italian Ordine dei giornalisti (Order of Journalists) or

the French Conseil Suprieur de lAudiovisuel (equivalent to
the FCC in the US)Two very different types of institutions.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

The international broadcasting company, public

or private, using short wave radio or satellites, that
makes it difficult for national media to hide or distort the
news.58
The autonomous non-commercial broadcasting
company59, whose sole purpose is to serve the public and
which constitutes implicit criticism of commercial media.
That category might be widened to include all high quality media whose primary aim is good journalism and
which can serve as models.

58

Like the BBC World Service or CNN or a Polish radio station

aimed at Belarus.

59

Like NSK in Japan or ARD in Germany

23

Processes
A higher education, a crucial M*A*S. Quality
media should only hire people with a university degree,
preferably (though this is controversial) one in mass communications.
A separate course on media ethics required for all
students in journalism.
Further education for working journalists: oneday workshops, one-week seminars, six-month or oneyear fellowships at universities. Such programs, quite
common in the US60, are very rare elsewhere.
An in-house awareness program to increase the
attention paid by media workers to the needs of citizens,
especially women and cultural, ethnic, sexual or other
minorities; or
Offering readers a news menu and asking them to
pick what they want to see on the front page next day.61

24

60

Like the Knight fellowships at Stanford University and the

Nieman Fellowships at Harvard U.

61

Like Chiles Las Ultimas Noticias or , in the US, the Wisconsin

State Journal.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Teaching journalists how to respond appropriately to readers/ listeners/ viewers on the phone or on the
Web.
Internally investigating major failures by a media
(serious inaccuracies, unfounded reports, lack of adequate coverage, etc.)62
Teaching journalists, through seminars and publications, how to organize and fight for quality.63
Building a data-base, within a media outlet, of all
errors (type, cause, person involved) so as to discern patterns and take measures.
An internal study of some issue involving the
public (like a newspapers relations with its customers).
An ethical audit: external experts come and evaluate the ethical awareness, guidelines, conduct within the
newspaper or station.
Giving the email addresses and/or telephone
numbers of editors and of journalists (whenever a story of
theirs is published).
The (controversial) readback of quotes to
sources to avoid errors.64

62

As done by CBS on a Dan Rather blunder (2004) and by the

New York Times on Jayson Blairs plagiarism and its uncritical
pre-war coverage of Iraq.

63

What MediaWise does in the UK.

64

As the Wall Street Journal encourages its reporters to do.

25

 A media at school program to train children

from an early age in the understanding and proper use of
media.
A media literacy campaign to educate and
mobilize the general public.
A listening session: once a week or irregularly,
editors man the phones to answer calls from readers.65
The regular encounter of news people with ordinary citizens in a press club , on the occasion of neighborhood meetings or even on a cruise66!
A regular (e.g. quarterly) opinion survey (polls,
public meetings, internet forum), commissioned by the
media, to get feedback from the person-in-the-street; also
a questionnaire on a newspaper or station website.
A nation-wide survey of public attitudes towards
all or some media (e.g. towards public broadcasting).
Polling the public or groups within it so as to
operate a barometer of satisfaction as opposed to the conventional systems of sales, ratings and shares.
Non-commercial research, done mainly by academics in the universities, but also in think-tanks or scientific observatories67, studies of the contents of media
(or the absence of them68), of the perception of media
messages by the public, of the impact of those messages.

26

65

As is done at some Brazilian papers.

66

The Belgian daily La Libre Belgique has organized such cruises.

67

Like the European Institute for the Media in Dsseldorf,

Germany.

68

Like Project Censored in the US.

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Organizing an occasional street demonstration to

promote some cause.69
Sponsoring a national or regional forum on a big
issue (e.g. The Hutchins Commission in the US -19371947) or limited issue, like local reporting.
An annual conference bringing together media
decision-makers, political leaders and representatives of
citizens groups of all kinds70.
An annual seminar on journalism criticism organized by a Journalism School.71
Attracting the finest minds to journalism by creating bridges between academe and media.72
International cooperation to promote media quality and accountability.73
A prize, and other tokens of satisfaction, to reward
quality media and ethical journalists74 or an anti-prize75.
69

In 2005, media watchdog organizations in Romania set up an

Information Fair to protest harassment by government.

70

Like, until 2005, the Universit de la communication in late

August, in Carcans-Maubuisson, later in Hourtin, SW France.

71

Like the one at the University of Tampere in Finland.

72

E;g. Reuters creating a Journalism Institute at Oxford.

Millionaire publisher Steven Brill by endowing such training at
Yale University.

73

Like the European alliance of press councils (AIPCE) or the

Ibero-American Federation of Ombudsmen.

74

Like that started in 1999 by the J-School at the University of

Oregon.

75

Like the Silver Sewer Award bestowed by Empower

America, a conservative media watchdog.
27

Internal, external and cooperative

Another classification of M*A*S depends on who
is involved: some M*A*S function exclusively inside the
newspaper or broadcast station; some exist outside of it
and escape its control; others require that media and nonmedia people work together. Those boxes, however, are
not air-tight: they allow variants of one M*A*S to slip
from one into either of the other two.
The internal M*A*S constitute self-regulation
proper, quality control in the narrow sense.
External M*A*S prove that accountability can be
applied to the media without their acceptance;
their aim is not reparation to aggrieved individuals but benefit to the public as a whole.
Cooperative M*A*S are certainly the most interesting since they imply that press, professionals
and public can join together for quality control.

28

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Internal M*A*S
Correction box, column

Code of ethics

Media page/ program

Ethics committee

Letter from the editor, sidebar

Disciplinary committee

Behind-the-scenes blog

Training to organize

Newsletter to subscribers

Whistle-blower

Media reporter

Newsroom committee

Consumer reporter

Media observatory

In-house critic

Order of journalists

Daily self-criticism report

Company of journalists

Investigative panel

Assoc. of specialized reporters

Media weblog by journalist

Assoc. of publishers & editors

Evaluation commission

International defense org.

Filtering agency

Publishing foreign material

Internal study of issues

Foreign views on own country

Readership survey

Non-profit newspaper

Ethical audit

(Public broadcasting)

Ethics coach
Internal memo

(International broadcasting)

Awareness program

(Quality service-oriented
media)

29

External M*A*S
Readers info blogs

Public statement by VIP

Alternative media

Higher education

Satirical news show

Required ethics course

Daily report on media

Non-profit research

Journalism review

Opinion survey on media

Darts and laurels

Media literacy campaign

Critical blogs

Media literacy website

Media-related website

Media-at-school program

Blog by sources

Consumer group

Critical book / report / film

Association of militant citizens

Guides to influence

Monitors for profession groups

Watchdog watchdog

Media-serving NGO

Petition to pressure media

Royal commission

Ad hoc federation

(Indep. regulatory agency)

30

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

Co-operative M*A*S
Letter to the editor

Citizen on board

On-line message board

Club of readers/ viewers

Outside media columnist

Local press council

Ombudsman

Annual conference

Complaints bureau

Seminar on media criticism

Listening session by editors

Training foreign bloggers

Accuracy & fairness question.

Yearbook on media crit.

Annual self-audit report

National press council

Grading the news

National ombudsman

Media barometer

Liaison committee

Paid advertisement

Occasional demonstration

Encounter with public

Media-related association

Website for public reaction

International cooperation

Panel of media users

Training NGO

Inviting in readers

Multi-purpose center

Readers chose Page One

Continuous education

Citizens journalism

Bridge institution

Radio clubs

Prize or other reward

Journalists email and phone

31

For more information, see the two books by

Claude-Jean BERTRAND ([email protected] ):
Media Ethics and Accountability Systems,
New Brunswick (NJ), Transaction, 2000 164 pages
[Originally published in French, translated in Armenia,
Brazil, China, Georgia, Greece, Italy, Japan, Korea,
Portugal, Romania & Turkey). (Albanian, Polish and
Russian translations in progress)
An Arsenal For Democracy: Media Accountability Systems , Cresskill (NJ), Hampton Press, 2003
420 pages. (Originally published in French (Economica,
1999), translated in Brazil (2002) and Japan (2003)).

32

M*A*S
MEDIA ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEMS

33