Madam, - Prof Colum Kenny's contribution to the debate about journalists who become players (July 21st) is to say that while a journalist's duty is to the truth and not to party or political process, "that is not to say that there may not be times when journalists can facilitate reconciliation in a conflict zone, so long as they maintain their professional perspective on any particular story and do not compromise, or appear to compromise, their duty to 'tell it as it is' ".
That statement leaves me puzzled. What does it mean? Does it mean, for instance, that a journalist who makes his home and counsel available to rival parties in a political conflict so that they can meet secretly to patch up their differences is acting ethically as long as his subsequent reporting does not take or appear to take sides between them?
Or does Prof Kenny mean to say that such a journalist must make his facilitating role public, as David Adams in a recent column suggested he or she should, even if this would inevitably rob the enterprise of its necessary secrecy? And who is to decide which conflicts merit a journalist's intervention and which do not? Just as one man's terrorist is another man's statesman, so one man's reconciliation work is another man's war-making.
Or to put it another way: if it would be acceptable in the context of Northern Ireland, according to Prof Kenny's yardstick, to broker secret talks between, for instance, Sinn Féin and the DUP as long as the reporter did not compromise the duty to tell the story "as it is", then would it also be acceptable for a journalist to help rival dissident republican (or loyalist) groupings settle their differences providing the same duty was upheld? One cannot reply "yes" to one and "no" to the other since the answer, plainly, should be "no" to both.
That is why news organisations regard non-intervention in politics as an all-embracing principle. Thus the New York Times code of ethics, for instance, says of this issue: "Journalists do not take part in politics. While staff members are entitled to vote and to register in party primaries, they must do nothing that might raise questions about their professional neutrality or that of our news operations."
This debate was sparked by an allegation or assertion that RTÉ Northern editor Tommie Gorman had played such a facilitating role in the Northern Ireland peace process.
Mr Gorman has in the past denied this allegation but both he and RTÉ have stayed silent during this more recent episode and by so doing have helped bestow credibility upon the claim.
The Irish media and the general public are entitled to hear from them about this matter. If it is not true, then fine, that is an end to it. But if it is, then we should be told what assurances were given to Sinn Féin and the DUP, whether these were approved by RTÉ management and if so at what level, whether future ethical breaches like this are to be tolerated and what liaison, if any, there was with government. - Yours, etc,
ED MOLONEY,
New York.