Unethical Media Practices revealed by IPRA Report
June 2002
International Public Relations Association survey reveals widespread incidences of "cash
for editorial"
London, June 14th 2002. "Cash for Editorial" and other unethical practices are rife in the
print and broadcast media of many countries around the world, especially in Southern and
Eastern Europe, Central and South America, according to a new study published today by
the International Public Relations Association (IPRA). But no region of the world seems
immune to the problem, which can take on highly sophisticated forms in countries where
it is least expected.
Public relations professionals in 52 countries were commenting on whether editorial
matter in their country normally appears as a result of editorial judgement of the
journalists involved and not through any influence or payment by a third party. Nearly
two thirds (63%) of respondents in Eastern Europe believe that the practice of zakazukha
- a Russian word meaning the acceptance of bribes by journalists in exchange for
editorial - is common in their country. Elsewhere, in Southern Europe (see list of regions
and countries in Appendix) and in the Africa/Middle East region, 40% of respondents
believe such a policy is rarely or not generally followed. The most transparent media
regions were Asia, with 68% agreeing that such a policy is always or usually followed,
North America with 65%, Australia with 60%, and Northern and Western Europe with
58.8%.
As part of IPRA's recently launched Campaign for Media Transparency (ICMT),
respondents were asked to indicate whether certain ethical standards were normally
followed by the media in their country. Two hundred and forty two public relations and
communications professionals, mostly senior practitioners working in local or
international consulting firms, took part in the online survey.
According to Alasdair Sutherland, Immediate Past President of IPRA and co-chairman of
the ICMT, the most common problems listed by respondents included: editors and
journalists asking for inducements to publish news releases or feature items, company
news releases appearing in exchange for paid advertising elsewhere in the publication,
advertisements disguised as editorial, material appearing through influence or payment
by a third party, and publications asking for payment not to publish certain stories.
Is it editorial or an ad?
Much advertising in South and Central America appears disguised as editorial material,
the IPRA survey shows. Fifty-nine percent of respondents in the region disagreed with
the statement "material which appears (in my country) in print or on air as a result of
payment is normally clearly identified as advertising or paid-for promotion and is not
disguised as editorial." For Eastern Europe the figure was 52% disagreeing, with 47% in
Africa/Middle East and 40% in Australia. North America scored the best with only 27%
disagreeing with the statement.
The issue of publications accepting free travel, accommodation or products revealed a
wide difference of practices. In the USA and Canada, 35% of respondents said that
publications "mostly" or always" refuse to accept free travel accommodation or products.
However in Eastern Europe 65% of respondents said that this policy was followed rarely
or not at all.
You pay, we fly
"IPRA's charter on media transparency asks that when a publication accepts products or
free travel or accommodation for its staff to test or review a product or service, this
should be clearly indicated in any resulting report," explains ICMT co-chairman Frank
Ovaitt of the USA.
Respondents were also asked if publications in their country have a written policy
covering the receipt of free samples, gifts and discounted materials from outsiders.
Seventy percent of respondents in the USA and Canada said this was generally or always
true. Looking at the reverse side, 73% of respondents in Africa and the Middle East, 59%
in Central and South America, 55% in Southern Europe, and 50% in Eastern Europe felt
such policies did not exist or were not followed at all.
Jacques Dinan, IPRA President for 2002 and a member of the Campaign Committee,
explains that members of IPRA subscribe to the Association's Code of Conduct, adopted
in Venice in 1961, which expressly forbids corruption of the integrity of channels of
public communication. "Our members undertake not to represent competing interests,
and not to enter into agreements where fees are dependent on the achievement of certain
results. This specifically prohibits a public relations firm being paid, dependent on the
type or amount of media coverage which appears," he says.
Do the media accept bribes not to run a story? "Rumours have also existed for many
years in certain countries that their media can be bribed to drop a story," explains Dinan.
"We asked respondents if they believed this happens in their country." In Australia 100%
of respondents said this never happens, and most other regions rejected this suggestion.
Percentages of respondents saying that this would "never" or "very rarely" happen were
97.5% for the USA, 87.5% for N.W.Europe, 68% for Asia, and 66% for Africa and the
Mid-East. However the most common regions where the media ask for inducements not
to run a story appear to be Eastern Europe, and Central & South America, where 17% of
respondents said it happens "often" or "all the time."
The survey shows that unethical behavior in media relations activity is prevalent in many
countries and can manifest itself in varying ways. Typical activities seen by IPRA as
unethical include:
A journalist in full time employment with a publication is also employed, either openly
or secretly, by a company or a public relations agency. This appears to occur most often
in Eastern Europe and in Africa/Middle East, where 27% of respondents reported this
happens "often" or "all the time."
An advertising agency sends out a press release to a publication's media sales
department in order to put pressure on the editor to use material from an advertiser. Here
Central and South America scored worst, with 47% of respondents alleging that this
happens often or all the time.
A newspaper or magazine attempts to charge a company for the cost of colour
separations for any editorial photograph they use featuring that company. In Northern and
Western Europe only 57% say this happens seldom or never, and 48% of respondents in
Eastern Europe. The practice appears less common in the regions of Asia, Africa and the
Middle East, Southern Europe, North America and Central & South America, where 65%
or more say happens "seldom" or "never."
The IPRA Online Media Transparency survey was conducted for IPRA by COM.X
research, based in Germany. IPRA members in 90 countries were contacted via e-mail
and invited to visit the COM.X website to fill in the ICMT questionnaire. 242 public
relations professionals in 54 countries responded.
MEDIA TRANSPARENCY INDEX WILL CONTINUE TO SPOTLIGHT THE ISSUE
"This online snapshot is the first, although relatively unsophisticated, step in measuring
the transparency of the media worldwide," Ovaitt explains. "As communications
professionals, it is our goal to eliminate practices such as 'cash for editorial' which have
been prevalent in certain countries."
The Institute for Public Relations, located in the US, is supporting the IPRA campaign
through the development and publication of a biennial international index of bribery and
the media. IPRA will also be encouraging media and broadcast organizations to sign the
IPRA Charter on Media Transparency, which is in preparation.
Media transparency is a world issue," says Ovaitt. "The credibility of any publication can
only be based on its independent objectivity. As long as the practice of illicit paid-for
editorial continues in any marketplace, the local public can never have confidence in
what they read." Publications which do not establish and maintain the trust of their
readers must eventually be rejected as paid-for propaganda, said the ICMT spokesman.
The IPRA Campaign for Media Transparency is led by a committee of senior public
relations professionals from around the globe. In addition to co-chairman Alasdair
Sutherland, Executive Vice President of Manning Selvage & Lee London, the members
include: co-chairman Frank Ovaitt, Crossover International, Virginia, USA; Jacques
Dinan, IPRA President 2002, Mauritius; Mrs. Ceyda Aydede, Global Tanitim Public
Relations, Turkey; Jim MacNamara, Carma Research, Australia; CT Hew, Golin/Harris
Forrest, Hong Kong; Alexei Sitnikov, Image Contact, Russia; Martti Hahl, Promaco,
Helsinki, Finland; and Professor David Turnbull of Seneca College, Toronto, Canada.
Notes to editors:
With over 900 members in 95 countries, IPRA is the world's leading professional
association for international public relations professionals. Established in 1955, the
organisation's activities include the IPRA Golden World Awards, the only global public
relations awards programme; professional development conferences and seminars;
publishing FrontLine, the global international public relations quarterly; the website
www.ipra.org, the leading public relations portal, regular Gold Papers on issues affecting
the international communications profession; assistance with the development of public
relations professionalism in new and emerging markets, and a wide range of professional
member services. The organisation also hosts a number of regional and conferences
annually, as well as a triennial World Congress on Public Relations.