Global Media Journal

Media Professionalization: A Middle East Imperative

Dr. John Merrill, Ph.D.
University of Missouri, United States

Various solutions to media malaise in the Middle East (and elsewhere) are being proposed by world-be reformers. Even the American president, George Bush, has called for “democracy” for countries in the region. Conferences proliferate throughout the Arab world dealing with media development and ethics. Something needs to be done, almost everyone agrees, but just what it is remains a mystery.

Better education, some say. More state-of-the-art technology, others say. More press freedom, say others. More liberal governments, is another suggestion. A consistent media philosophy. More public participation in media decisions. A greater variety of media. Fewer, but better, media. The proposals go on.

Now, there are those who say that Middle East media are just fine. There is no malaise.

There are, indeed, bright spots among Arab media and without a doubt sophisticated journalism has made great inroads in the last couple of decades. But the picture is still rather bleak. Mainly because there is little or no journalistic freedom, and a firm ethical foundation is lacking.

As an “outsider” having spent only about a year and half in Egypt observing the goings on of he media, I feel somewhat uncomfortable making any media proposals myself. But I will. Unlike President Bush with his wish to install “American-style” democracy in the Middle East, I would like to propose reform from within these countries, by the Arab press itself. As I see it “American-style” democracy is more plutocratic than democratic, and American media are far from having an ethical foundation.

In the U.S. there is, within some media circles and educational circles, a new emphasis on communitarianism, on greater public involvement in media decisions, on sensitivity for

public desires. This new journalism project is referred to as “public” or “civic” journalism. It indicates that many American journalists seem to be willing to be led rather than to lead. My solution to media malaise is almost the exact opposite of public journalism I would make journalism more exclusive, more independent of public dictates, not less so.

And the way to do this is to professionalize the media, and this would be an indigenous operation in every country. Today, around the world, journalism is not a profession. It is either an instrument of a government or party, or it is a free-wheeling and private assortment of media institutions. It has no solidity, no collegiality, no controls, no common goals or ethical standards.

What I am proposing for Middle Eastern media—as for media in the West also—is a will to become professionalized. A profession is a self-regulating, meritocratic, public-service association of workers in a special field. This is not what journalism is—anywhere.

Such a profession would be free of outside control. It would regulate itself. It would rid itself of journalistic “bad seeds”; it would have definite ethical standards and would be dedicated to public service. Therefore it would provide an institutionalized solution to the freedom and the ethics problem facing the mass media today. It would, as a profession, be free, and it would exercise control over its practitioners Quite different from the present situation worldwide, where the owners or the government have the freedom and the power, and the active journalists in effect have neither

A media (or journalistic) profession would be exclusive, democratic, meritocratic, responsible, cooperative, proud, loyal, in charge of its own policies, and peer-policing. In short, a journalistic profession would put its faith in its own professional expertise, and not in the whims of the public. Yes, it would be elitist, but at least the elitism would be in the hands of the professional workers and not in the hands of the government lackeys or the plutocratic media owners.

No: it would not be a “people’s press.” It would be a journalist’s press. It would not be an owner’s press—or a government’s press. So professionalization would put the journalism in the hands of the professional journalists and assure media autonomy. It would, at the same time, assure a commonality in ethical behavior.

What is probably most important is that being a profession would require merit on the part of the journalists. There would be minimum entrance requirements—probably a university degree (journalism & mass comm. preferred). A PJE, a professional journalism exam, would be required, administered by the profession itself. Also interviews and psychological tests would be taken by the applicant, along with the submission of sample work.

The new professional would agree on the professional group’s Code of Ethics. And a license or certificate would be awarded. The professional journalist would know that he or she could be dismissed (“de-pressed”) from the profession for serious job dereliction or deviation from professional ethics.

A journalism profession would probably have several elective bodies, all coming from the membership itself. It would need an Executive Board, a membership committee, an ethics committee, an awards committee, and finally (but very important), a Bargaining Committee that would have to deal with the mass medium’s management in terms of working conditions, salary, physical facilities, leaves of absence, etc. . In many ways, such a profession would be similar to a union. But, of course, it would transcend mere unionization, being greatly concerned with meritocracy, professional standards, skills, ethical behavior, and continuing education.

In many parts of the world, especially in the Middle East, a transition to professional journalism would not be easy. The media could proceed toward professionalizing only if the national leader were liberal enough to allow it. If and when this will be the case is uncertain, even doubtful at present. But it can happen. And it must happen if the media are to be free and responsible.

Professionalization in the media is not a Western model. It is a global necessity for media systems, rising from their own values and cultures, desire to have creative autonomy and, at the same time, social responsibility.