Media and corporate social responsibility
Updated: 2014-05-20 09:20
By Ho Lok-sang(HK Edition)
|
|||||||||
Corporate social responsibility (CSR) and business ethics are subjects now featured in almost all credible business programs worldwide. Corporations, even public companies, should not just maximize profits. Staying within the bounds of the law, of course, is the least we expect of corporations and it is not CSR. No business professor will now agree with economist Milton Friedman that maximizing profits within the bounds of the law is the single most important task business executives have to do.
Yes, CSR is a burden, implying that it should be expected to affect profits. If CSR was not a burden, then we really should not refer to an act that appears to showcase it as a genuine case of CSR. A more appropriate name would be a public relations or good-will exercise. Not being prepared to give up some profits, or acting mainly to maximize long-term ones, is not wrong. But to describe this as an act of CSR would not be right.
Of all corporations, media ones stand out as particularly laden with the burden of CSR. Media corporations publish and broadcast. In doing so, they contribute to the making of, or evolution of, social values and culture.
Recently, 38-year-old Matthew Gentzkow of the University of Chicago was awarded the Clark Medal by the American Economic Association, which every year honors the nation's most promising economist under age 40. In a 2010 paper jointly authored with colleague Jesse M. Shapiro, he studied huge volumes of data to examine the news media - the economic forces driving it, its political slant and its effects on society. An example of such a slant is that Democrats would call the tax payable on one's estate upon one's death "estate tax" but Republics would call it "death duty".
The paper found the perceived political identity of a newspaper's owner accounted for much less of the paper's slant than the political biases of its readers. Indeed, the apparent bias relating to ownership may be due to the geographic location of newspapers. This may show the political biases of different communities. Put simply, newspapers appear mainly to "give what their readers want". If readers are biased in one way or another, newspapers will orient their reporting and commentaries to reflect such biases.
This market-oriented approach is an aspect of capitalism. Economists call this "consumer's sovereignty", which says that in free markets, profit-maximizing producers will give consumers what they want rather than trying to dictate their preferences. Unfortunately, this means any existing biases will be reinforced and become even more entrenched. It then becomes more difficult for readers to see the real picture and form judgments based on accurate information and unbiased reporting.
But newspapers, radios, televisions, and magazines provide a platform for the formation of public opinion, social values, and the evolution of culture. They are supposed to be the guardians of the public interest and provide checks and balances on governments and powerful corporations. Media corporations which pursue this mission seriously take accurate and unbiased reporting seriously. They will offer honest commentaries and analyses.
Of course, as human beings, commentators can be biased one way or another. That is why being "honest" and presenting different views are important. Honest means the commentator honestly presents his or her views based on information he or she can gather. Modifying the view because of a perceived need to please someone, or to hurt someone politically, or boost sales is unethical.
I was appalled but not surprised - given Gentzkow's findings - when I learnt what a Japanese reporter said recently. The Japanese reporter said he believed that an historical document from 1945, recently disclosed by the Jilin Archives Office, which recorded a transaction of 252,000 yen involving the Japanese army to fund comfort women services for its soldiers, was genuine. But the Japanese reporter believed this news would probably not be reported in any detail. This is because of the unpopularity of such news and because there is a possibility the authenticity of the report could be questioned. He said: "These days 80 percent of Japanese do not like China. So media from both the left and the right will probably not report this piece of news."
If all media corporations accept it is their social responsibility to report the truth and foster debate on social and public issues - with a view to help solving them - they will form an important part of that society's social capital. If, instead of taking up this responsibility, they succumb to the economic or political interests of their patrons and deviate from this important responsibility, they could foster discrimination, divisiveness, hatred, and violence. Media corporations should treasure the press freedom they enjoy in Hong Kong. They should contribute to building rather than eroding social capital.
The author is director of the Center for Public Policy Studies at Lingnan University.
(HK Edition 05/20/2014 page9)