Dear Partners,

I am a former journalist, and the matter under today’s discussion is definitely strongly topical. Yes, in a rapidly changing media landscape, as our partner Ariev reported, the media with serious financial problems become too vulnerable in terms of professionalism, being dependent on their sponsors. And the result of financial doping is one: biased media and service to sponsors’ political or economic interests.

It is here that the issue of media ethics and responsibility arise, because the payer formulates its political order and in this case it becomes totally meaningless to talk about freedom of the press and freedom of speech. Dependent on the external funding, media stops carrying out its professional mission turning into the sponsor’s private instrument. Of course, both are welcomed the IFJ Declaration of Principles on the Conduct of Journalists, and the Codes of Conduct adopted at national level in almost all the CE member states by journalists and media. However, to be sincere, do those Codes of Conduct actually regulate an up-to-date problem, such as media ethics and responsibility, which is the key issue of the presented report?

Still back in 2007 a Supervisory Body on Media Ethics was established, which has drafted a Code of Ethical Principles for Media and Journalists in Armenia. The Supervisory Body still exists, there are decent and professional people in this structure, and multiple media in Armenia has signed the mentioned Code of Ethics. However, some of the mentioned media are themselves the first violators of the ethical norms.

Therefore, dear reporter, my approach to the matter is somewhat different: as long as the media don’t have financial independence and are under the financial influence of various political-economic centres, we will regularly encounter the same problem, the problem of media ethics and responsibility. On one occasion Marquez was asked: How is it possible to differentiate ethics from professionalism?” The latter responded: “It is the same as to try to differentiate the buzzing from the fly.” This means where there is a violence of ethics there can’t be professionalism. It is an axiom. As for freedom of speech, according to my deep confidence, it is a citizen’s constitutional right to receive reliable information. And what Marquez talk about concerning indissolubility of professionalism and ethics, it is a matter of personal choice for each media and journalist.