The International Press Institute’s General Assembly stated that “it endorsed these principles because all attempts to corrupt the media compromise the freedom of expression that protects all other rights," according to Johann P. Fritz, Director of the International Press Institute. Peter Eigen, Chairman of the Board of Transparency International said, "The media has an important watchdog role to hold to account those in positions of power. To be credible in this role, it is essential that journalists refuse bribes and the corporate sector desists from offering bribes. It is also crucial that editors, publishers and media owners give journalists all the support they need to implement the media transparency principles..."
Not everyone in the two professions support the concept of media transparency. Among critics of transparency are those who have written about transparency as a false idea, especially the kind of transparency fostered by television’s entertainment values (Balkin, 1998). Others have argued that the metaphor of transparency glosses other apt characterizations of globalization – stretching, shrinking, networking, flows, etc. (Moores, 2002).

Unrestrained Transparency can be detrimental because...

In addition, others have suggested that unrestrained transparency might be detrimental because: (a) openness might aggravate conflict in the absence of universally shared, or at least mutually compatible, norms of behaviour; (b) some secrets are legitimately worth protecting if revelation will betray, for instance, competitive market advantage; and (c) information can easily be misused or misinterpreted because transparency reveals behaviour but not intent (Florini, 1998). Indeed, the success of the European Union (EU) has been ascribed by some observers to its resistance to transparency and the culture of secrecy.

Principles of Media Transparency

In 2004, six global organizations announced their support for a set of principles designed to foster greater transparency in the dealings between public relations professionals and the media, and to end bribery for media coverage throughout the world (IPRA, 2004). The organizations are the International Press Institute, the International Federation of Journalists, Transparency International, the Global Alliance for Public Relations and Communications Management, the Institute for Public Relations Research and Education, and the International Public Relations Association. The principles, embodied in the “Charter on Media Transparency” developed by the International Public Relations Association, are that:
§ News material should appear as a result of the news judgment of journalists and editors, and not as a result of any payment in cash or in kind, or any other inducements.
§ Material involving payment should be clearly identified as advertising, sponsorship or promotion.
§ No journalist or media representative should ever suggest that news coverage will appear for any reason other than its merit.
§ When samples or loans of products or services are necessary for a journalist to render an objective opinion, the length of time should be agreed in advance and loaned products should be returned afterward.
§ The media should institute written policies regarding the receipt of gifts or discounted products and services, and journalists should be required to sign the policy (IPRA, 2004).

Communications and Society

As far back as 1993, the Parliamentary Assembly of Europe affirmed that information and communication play a very important role in the formation of citizens’ personal attitudes and the development of society and democratic life. The Assembly noted that:
A clear distinction must be drawn between news and opinions, making it impossible to confuse them. News is information about facts and data, while opinions convey thoughts, ideas, beliefs or value judgment on the part of media companies, publishers or journalists.
News broadcasting should be based on truthfulness, ensured by the appropriate means of verification and proof, and impartiality in presentation, description and narration. Rumor must not be confused with news. News headlines and summaries must reflect as closely as possible the substance of the facts and data presented.
Expression of opinions may entail thoughts or comments on general ideas or remarks on news relating to actual events. Although opinions are necessarily subjective and therefore cannot and should not be made subject to the criterion of truthfulness, we must ensure that opinions are expressed honestly and ethically.
Opinions taking the form of comments on events or actions relating to individuals or institutions should not attempt to deny or conceal the reality of the facts or data (Parliamentary Council of Europe, 1993)
Concerns about press standards have led to discussions about regulation of the media. A strong case for media transparency was outlined in 1994 by the Council of Europe for free circulation of information without interference by either corporate media conglomerates or public authorities. European ministers on the council argued that corporate concentration would have an adverse impact on media independence. The communication act of 2003 stopped short of formerly regulating the media, due to concerns about freedom of the press. However, in 2001, the International Public Relations Association (IPRA) launched its media transparency campaign beginning with some research to get a handle on the magnitude of the problem. "In too many countries, bribery of the news media robs citizens of truthful information that they need to make individual and community decisions," said Dr. Donald K. Wright, 2004 President of the International Public Relations Association. "We started this campaign with the goal of creating greater transparency and eliminating unethical practices in dealings between news sources and the media." With 242 member respondents representing 54 countries, they noted that:
50% of the North American respondents indicated that they would accept free travel, accommodation or products while 87% in Eastern Europe and 85% in Southern Europe said they never refused such offers.
Twenty per cent of the North American respondents said that they believed print advertisements are often produced to look like editorial content with no indication to the reader that this was an advertisement, and the percentage who believed this happened often was even larger in other parts of the world (IPRA, 2001).
Not withstanding the narrowness of the IPRA survey and questions about its validity, it reflects genuine concern in the business community about the ethical standards and practice of the media. Reviewing the implications of the survey, Patricia Parsons concluded that “it appears that there is indeed a problem with media transparency, and the public relations industry seems to be in bed with the media in many of these instances” (Parsons, 2004).
Based on the survey’s results, the organization drafted a “Charter on Media Transparency” in March 2002 that stipulates that the organization calls on media managers providers to observe the following:
§ Editorial. Editorial appears as a result of the editorial judgment of the journalists involved, and not as a result of any payment in cash or in kind, or barter by a third party.
§ Identification. Editorial which appears as a result of a payment in cash or in kind, or barter by a third party will be clearly identified as advertising or a paid promotion.
§ Solicitation. There should be no suggestion by any journalist or members of staff of an editorial provider, that editorial can be obtained in any way other than through editorial merit.
§ Sampling. Third parties may provide samples or loans of products or services to journalists where it is necessary for such journalists to test, use, taste or sample the product or service in order to articulate an objective opinion about the product or service. The length of time required for sampling should be agreed in advance and all loaned products or services should be returned after sampling.
§ Policy statement. Editorial providers should prepare a policy statement regarding the receipt of gifts or discounted products and services from third parties by their journalists and other staff. Journalists and other staff should be required to read and sign acceptance of the policy. The policy should be available for public inspection (Palmer, 2005).

The History of Media Transparency

Over the last two decades, Media Transparency has remained a very topical issue in Public Relations (PR) management. It probably has come as a surprise to their counterparts in the media that PR industry is concerned about their role in maintaining media transparency. According to Patricia Parsons (2004), “If something is transparent, we generally think of being able to see through it. What this implies is that if something is transparent, then all that lies beneath it can be seen.”
In relating this to the media, it would involve issues of ownership, influence and control. It also includes reporting that provides media consumers with enough information to make their own decisions about the legitimacy of the information presented to them (Parsons, 2004). The issue of ownership will affect who dictates what should be released to the public and how strong is the influence of the owners on the information being meted to the public. This often presents a dilemma for the PR practitioner who will need to be firm in adhering to the code of conduct of the profession. Very often, information is not made completely transparent to the public.
The mystique surrounding the way journalists do their jobs and the way media companies operate has estranged readers and viewers from the media. According to Martha Stone (2002), it has caused precipitous credibility erosion over the past three decades. Recently, globalization added its impact to this credibility erosion. Such behaviour as accepting free travel, accommodation or products for publications, producing print advertisements to look like editorial content with no indication to the reader that this is an advertisement, gratification for killing a negative story or exchange of money for coverage has become very rampart among media professionals. In several countries all over the world, there had been problems of misquoting, quote truncation, placing quotes out of order to arrive at an unintended meaning, quoting out of context or manipulating interviews in the interest of a particular agenda. Another main concern has been that of privacy of an individual and what constitutes a news story or a gratuitous invasion into a person’s private life. "Last year the Institute for Public Relations Research and Education joined with the International Public Relations Association to release a comprehensive index that ranks 66 nations for the likelihood that print journalists will seek or accept cash for news coverage," said Frank Ovaitt, President and CEO-Elect of the Institute. He stated further: "We continue to believe this is a critical issue that serious journalists and public relations people must address together."