By exploring 2 sets of ethical values, we suggest a theoretical framework for understanding media accountability products. The first set is exclusive to the field of journalism and consists of distinctive values (accuracy, balance, etc.). The second set is nonexclusive, crossing professional fields, and consists of principles for communicating organizational imperfection (responsibility, transparency, and relationality). On the basis of this theoretical construction we formulate an empirical model for assessing products of accountability. The model was applied to 1,458 corrections published in a representative newspaper from Israel, the United States, and the United Kingdom ranging in their levels of adherence to a formal accountability policy. We conclude by asking how the expectations from news organizations to adhere to principles of accountability may be realized.
Processes of media answerability are important for the professional conduct of media organizations and their analysis allows a better understanding of the negotiation among public actors over journalistic practices perceived as deviant. By intersecting public criticism over perceived deviant political interviews with Israeli ombudsmen’s responses to these complaints, our aims are to (1) characterize processes of media answerability within the institution of the ombudsman and in the open public arena; (2) identify diversions between the public and the ombudsmen perspectives regarding perceived deviating practices (over-aggressive and over-deferent style of interviewing) and their causes (political bias and violations of interpersonal codes of behavior); (3) pinpoint the outcomes of media answerability processes. Our findings suggest that while a disrespectful attitude toward public figures bothers the public more than an overly deferential approach, the ombudsmen tend to reject both types of complaint. At the causal level, while citizens point to interviewers’ ideological bias as the main explanation for all types of deviations, the ombudsmen tend to accept complaints regarding violations of interpersonal codes of behavior and reject claims of political bias. In conclusion, we point to the advantages and limitations of a media answerability process.
Social media platforms have a powerful role as one of the main gatekeepers of the online sphere, alongside search engines and Internet service providers. Yet, given the variety of regulatory mechanisms, technological tools, and nonlegal ethical guidelines employed in regulating content on social media platforms, we argue that there is a need today for a consistent unified formal online content regulation structure. To address this issue, a number of European countries have suggested an old‐new policy instrument—the Internet ombudsperson. This article, therefore, develops the concept, firstly by framing it as part of the evolution of the institution of the media ombudsperson. We then describe the theoretical and conceptual framework of Internet ombudsperson and propose future implementations including a traditional national (mainly offline) model as well as an international blockchain model. We conclude by discussing the merits and drawbacks of our proposal as well as its possible theoretical implications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.