Transcript Kode etik jurnalistik

Kode etik jurnalistik
Kode etik jurnalistik
• Pelindung kredibilitas tindakan jurnalistik yg
tercermin dari nilai-nilai kunci (key values) yang
dirinci dalam kode etik
Kode etik jurnalistik
• Wartawan Indonesia bersikap
independen, menghasilkan berita yang
akurat, berimbang, dan tidak beritikad
buruk
• Wartawan Indonesia menempuh caracara yang profesional dalam
melaksanakan tugas jurnalistik.
• Wartawan Indonesia selalu menguji
informasi, memberitakan secara
berimbang, tidak mencampurkan fakta
dan opini yang menghakimi, serta
menerapkan asas praduga tak bersalah.
• Wartawan Indonesia tidak membuat
berita bohong, fitnah, sadis, dan cabul.
• Wartawan Indonesia tidak
menyalahgunakan profesi dan tidak
menerima suap.
• Wartawan Indonesia memiliki hak tolak
untuk melindungi narasumber yang tidak
bersedia diketahui identitas maupun
keberadaannya, menghargai ketentuan
embargo, informasi latar belakang, dan
“off the record” sesuai dengan
kesepakatan.
• Wartawan Indonesia tidak menulis atau
menyiarkan berita berdasarkan
prasangka atau diskriminasi terhadap
seseorang atas dasar perbedaan suku,
ras, warna kulit, agama, jenis kelamin,
dan bahasa serta tidak merendahkan
martabat orang lemah, miskin, sakit,
cacat jiwa atau cacat jasmani.
• Wartawan Indonesia menghormati hak
narasumber tentang kehidupan
pribadinya, kecuali untuk kepentingan
publik.
• Wartawan Indonesia segera mencabut,
meralat, dan memperbaiki berita yang
keliru dan tidak akurat disertai dengan
permintaan maaf kepada pembaca,
pendengar, dan atau pemirsa
• Wartawan Indonesia melayani hak jawab
dan hak koreksi secara proporsional.
• Penilaian akhir atas pelanggaran kode etik
jurnalistik dilakukan Dewan Pers.
Sanksi atas pelanggaran kode etik jurnalistik
dilakukan oleh
organisasi wartawan dan atau perusahaan pers.
MERITS
• The Multidimensional Ethical Reasoning and
Inquiry Task Sheet
Lembar kerja penyelidikan alasan etis
multidimensi
Perkakas yg membantu membuat keputusan etis
yg baik
1. Conflicting values 2.normative framework
3.stakeholder interest 4. dities and effects
1. Conflicting values
• Identify & explain the key values in conflict in dillema.
Examine the importance of each & articulate the conflict
*explain how each value might be given priority and thus
offer a solution
*decide which value should be given priority and justify it
*will your decision promote key concepts such justice,
respect, tranparancey,etc? how so?
*are these concepts override by some other compelling
interest?
*if they are, justify the exception that your decision creates
Normative framework
• Considerwhich philosohical approach is most applicable
& articulate how it should guide ethical thinsking in this
case
*does the dillema primarily pose question of unequal
power relations or of fairness?consider how Rawls could
be apllied
*does the dillema primarily pose a question of possible
special treatment,equality or the relative importance of
truthfulness? Consider how Kant could be applied
&does the dillema primarily pose a question of balancing
of rights or of the relative usefulness if moderation?
Consider how Aristotle could be applied
Stakeholder interests
• Identify all potential parties that would be affected by
your decision or have legitimate interest in the outcome
*what exactly is the potential harm faced by various
stakeholders, and how might you minimize it?
*which stakeholder should be given priority? Justify,
drawing from the appropriate philosophical framework
*which stakeholder appears to have the most to gain from
your decision?which appears to have the most to lose?
*how might you accommodate secondary stakeholders
Duties and Effects
• Consider how all your opinion reflect the moral duties you may have
& how they may advance your effectiveness as a moral agent
*to whom are you directly responsible or accountable?
*what duties do you have in your role as media professional?
*once you decide on a justifiable course of action, consider whether
your decision emphasizes certain duties or values over others. What
are they?
*is your decision duty-based, or is it based on your desire to produce a
certain outcome?
How would you feel about your decision if it were to be widely
publicized?
MERITS
• Obviously is not intended to uncover the
definitive “ethical” course of action that should
be taken in a given dilemma.different people
may well emerge from the model with very
different decisions and equally compelling
justifications for them
MERITS
• If we can become effective in knowing which
questions to ask and keep our focus on the
appropriate ethical issue (as opposed to
political,personal, or economic ones), more solid
ethical reasoning and heightened selfawereness
is likely to emerge from the resulting discussions
kasus
• "PSSI itu bukang perusahaang. Kalau sedang
diterangkang, coba dengarkang, penting itu
pengalamang. Mengerti kang?..." tulis
@tifsembiring, Selasa (1/3/2011).
• Ahmad Dhani tak masalah telah dilaporkan
wartawan Global TV terkait kasus dugaan
penganiayaan. Namun, pihak Dhani
menganggap laporan wartawan Global TV itu
berlebihan.