Media lessons from Scandinavia - where press self-regulation works

A Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) article begins by extolling the media landscape in Scandinavian countries in the following terms:


The Scandinavian population has among the highest news readership in the world, and can choose among the world's greatest number, per capita, of local and national newspapers."

So, asks the writer, Lauren Kirchner, what are these countries doing right?

She then lists seven lessons that the American media could learn from Scandinavia's media. Some have little or no relevance in Britain, such as the joys of public service broadcasting, and the continuing high use of teletext services (amazing).

But I've selected three that do merit attention. The first one is something of an eye-opener for two reasons. First, it praises press self-regulation. Second, it's unusual to see a US journalist favouring press regulation of any kind. Here's Kirchner's view:

"Self-regulation works, as long as everyone's on board. Scandinavia's press councils are independent organisations, staffed and (for the most part) funded by the journalism industry, that were established to give readers a place to bring grievances against news outlets.

Each one is like a combination ombudsman and courtroom: the reader with the complaint and the news organisation in question have their say, and then a group of journalists, editors, and members of the public decide whether to uphold or deny the complaint.

If they decide that the news organisation has broken the journalistic code of ethics, the organisation must pay penance by printing or broadcasting a notice saying so.

Involvement in the press council system is voluntary, but pretty much every news organisation in each country belongs; audiences recognise the outlets' signing up for such scrutiny as a kind of stamp of accountability...

As I've previously noted, there have been a few attempts at similar self-regulation systems in the US, each on a much smaller scale. In order to follow this Scandinavian press council model, news organisations here would have to all agree on a code of ethics, all agree to submit themselves to external evaluation and potential punishment, and all contribute money directly to the council for its operational costs.

That kind of organised institutionalism seems unlikely to be successful here, in such a fractured landscape. But more frequent (and more publicised) industry-wide conversations about standards, ideals, and ethics couldn't hurt, either."

It's a reminder that self-regulation is not itself the problem. It is all about publishers, editors and journalists creating a culture in which it works effectively.

As the Leveson inquiry moves into its final module - the what-is-to-be-done stage - it is sobering to reflect on what we will lose by having screwed up self-regulation.

How to protect whistleblowers

Kirchner reminds her US journalistic audience that Sweden's first freedom of the press act is older than the United States itself. She continues:

"Today, the principle of public access in the Swedish constitution requires that all court records, documents, and communications within the government be available to the public. Government employees are encouraged to provide information to journalists, and punishing them for doing so is prohibited...



She quotes Tom Moring, journalism professor at the Swedish School of Social Science: "In Finland, Sweden, Norway, and Denmark, the idea of the publicity of official documents is holy. This transparency is a very crucial part of our society."

Kirchner points out that "US shield law is toothless by comparison", but - in Britain's case - there is no such specific law. We rely instead on judicial interpretations of "the public interest".

End the elitist entrance to journalism

Kirchner's main concern is about the high cost of US university journalism courses as compared to free education in Denmark. But the expense of tertiary education in Britain is also problematic, especially if people then take masters degrees. So I identify with her final point:

"The current system is discouragingly elitist. A challenging, inexpensive training program that evaluated students on talent rather than on family names or bank accounts would be in everyone's best interest, especially the industry that would be hiring its graduates.

Unfortunately, as long as the industry is itself in financial duress, it's unlikely that this will materialise. But news organisations should, at the very least, enliven their newsrooms by considering job candidates with unconventional resumés and informal training."

Source: CJR