Global Journalism Ethics. Ward, Stephen J.A. (2010). Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press. pp. 296.
Ward notes that traditional journalism values and practices are being questioned due to the global nature of modern journalism and the rapid changes brought about by digital and wireless technologies. Ward concludes that journalists are struggling to maintain a “credible ethical identity as they sail the roiling sea” of the modern media world (p. 3). Ward’s bold objective is to look at journalism’s future and offer conceptual inventions to help move journalism ethics forward, with an eventual goal of converging theoretical foundations and practical proposals. Although those looking for concrete practical proposals to follow in a global setting might be disappointed that Ward doesn’t get quite that far, his impressive theoretical framework provides an excellent starting point for scholars interested in journalism ethics in a wired, globalized world. As Ward writes, the goal of the book is to supply “the basic philosophical concepts to begin the invention of a detailed and theoretically solid global [journalism] ethics” (p. 235).
The book is divided into two sections, although it covers three distinct topics. In the first and longest section, Ward explains his approach to ethics and presents his general theory of ethics. In chapter one, Ward explains the basic idea of ethics and his naturalistic approach, which conceives of ethics as a rational, human invention. In chapter two, he describes his holistic approach to “reflective engagement,” explains his three-level theory of ethical reasoning, and presents an accompanying model of journalism ethics informed by that theory. Ward uses chapter three to argue that the aim of ethics should be a congruence of the good—a theory that humans should strive to flourish or grow on four levels—and the right—“a Rawlsian theory of right for a liberal democratic society or well-ordered society” (p. 103). Ward argues this congruence leads to ethical flourishing or a combination of “the good” and “the right.” Ultimately, the goal of these first chapters is to argue that the true aim of ethics is the creation of a liberal democracy in which citizens are truly free to govern themselves with meaningful decisions that actually influence the structure and function of government. In the second section, Ward expands on his theoretical foundations and discusses how his theories of ethics form the basic concepts of global journalism ethics, with an emphasis on how journalism can advance democracy. In chapter six, Ward presents his third topic, and finally applies his ethical framework to a practical question: To what extent can a global journalist be a patriot?
The book’s greatest strength is Ward’s presentation of his personal approach to ethics and his systematic theoretical discussion of ethics and philosophy, as he lays the foundations for his vision of ethics and global journalism ethics. Ward’s intelligence is evident, and his deep appreciation for and understanding of the classic works of political and moral philosophy greatly inform his work. His approach to ethics is rooted in social contract theory, classic liberal democratic theory, John Rawls’s theories of justice and the human good, and cosmopolitan ethics, an ethical system that asserts “the equal value and dignity of all people as members of a common humanity” (p. 154). This emphasis on liberal democratic theory and the role of journalists in promoting a global democratic world lead him away from simplistic discussions of the role of objectivity in modern journalism, or yet another analysis of the differences between bloggers, commentators, and journalists. Instead, Ward focuses on how journalism may serve the greater goal of advancing the public good in a multitude of settings and locations. While Ward is interested in the convergence of theory and practice, it should be noted that he does not advocate for one unique code of journalism ethics as a practical goal. In his conclusion, Ward posits the goal of global journalism ethics should be “the gradual adoption of a cosmopolitan attitude that works as a force for improving global media and reducing the dangers of parochial journalism” (p. 236).
Unfortunately, Ward spends so much of the book explaining his theoretical foundations, he is left with little room to actually apply them to journalism. Although Ward discusses journalism ethics as a type of applied ethics in the first three chapters, it is not until nearly 170 pages into the book that he truly begins to apply his theoretical framework to journalism, and even much of this discussion operates at the level of metaethics rather than applied ethics. Anyone without at least some foundation in classic philosophical and political theory or a profound interest in these topics could quickly become frustrated with Ward’s exhaustive and nuanced writing or his overwhelming focus on theory.
It is difficult to know exactly how best to use Ward’s book. While the book is a must-read for serious scholars of journalism ethics or anyone interested in the changing role of the press in a liberal democratic society and should be consulted by anyone who teaches journalism ethics, the book’s heavy theoretical focus and Ward’s dense writing style make much of the book inaccessible to less advanced students of ethics. Sections of chapters one and two could be used in an introductory course—for example to help students understand the meaning of ethics and why ethics are important. However, it is unlikely an undergraduate would make it through the entire first 102 pages of the book without a great deal of difficulty. While graduate students would benefit from Ward’s excellent discussion of the foundations of ethics, liberal democratic theory, and Rawls’s theories, they would certainly need at least one introductory ethics courses to fully grasp Ward’s advanced analysis. The best use of the book would be in an advanced graduate seminar on global journalism ethics in which the first half of the course was devoted to reading the original works that Ward uses to construct his philosophical foundations and the second half was dedicated to a close reading of Ward’s book. That’s certainly a course I would have enjoyed in graduate school.
DERIGAN SILVER
University of Denver