Maintaining Professional Integrity and Personal Dignity

Issue 498, December 13, 2010
Translated by Zhang Chao
Original article: [Chinese]

Recently, microbloggers have questioned the conduct of the executives and reporters at the Economic Observer by suggesting that they have accepted illegal bribes. In the week following the rumor's spread, we made no public response. However we have not been irresponsible. We are a media unit, and we understand the importance of a good reputation. But, we would rather silently forebear an injustice than unwittingly lie to our readers.

The media is responsible for reporting the truth and keeping the public informed, and trust is its lifeblood. All along we have adhered to our principles of reason and constructivism. Whatever the topic, we have made every effort to stick to these principles and fairly and objectively conduct interviews and write reports. In the short history of our newspaper, we have made mistakes, but we have never abused the trust of the public nor have we intentionally distorted the truth or sought bribes. We strive to avoid such problems in our interviews and our writing. We know that distortions in our interviews would be unjust to the interviewee and would plant seeds of distrust in the public.

As to what has been written on microblogs about us, our attitude is - to become a platform for free speech, the opinions expressed on microblogs are free and daring and play an important role in the free expression of citizens and the sharing of public information. We are also pioneers and practitioners of this. We are also convinced that microblogs can shoulder more responsibilities, and can become a better embodiment of a platform for public interests and demands.

Since the establishment of the Economic Observer, we have stuck to the principles of rationality and constructivism. On this basis, we welcome any supervision from all walks of life. We insist that everyone has the freedom to criticize, but they should base their criticisms on fact. If we feel their criticisms apply to us, we accept them, but we will defend ourselves if we feel they are unjust. We know that the reliability of a medium depends on the discipline of its practitioners.

It is not our intention to suggest that all criticisms directed toward us are malicious, but we are concerned about not being treated with equal rationality and sincerity. This is not cowardly, and it is not a categorical rejection of criticism and questions. We constantly remind ourselves: in this complicated world, only responsibility and morality can make the media and its workers reliable and win them respect.

We and our peers acknowledge that as a media platform, we face a complex environment. Opinions and reports may provoke an arrest from those in power and just as easily be swayed by the lure of money. It is true that some reporters write irresponsible articles careless about facts, an act which abuses public trust for their own personal gain and may ruin the overall image of the news media. Such conduct is counterproductive to the entire media industry, and a great enemy against whom our newspaper must always be on guard.

Some believe that in this era, survival requires that commitment to principles and steadfastness be abandoned. But we do not because we know that readers buy our newspaper because they trust our paper. When we encounter setbacks, the community offers us their help because we are trusted.

We will not betray their trust. We know, in this era of transition, reliable media and news reports are more precious than gold. This is the value of the “Qiu Ziming Incident” to the press. We know, that what our media colleagues and the public try to protect is not Qiu nor the Economic Observer, but reliable news coverage and public supervision, and the press that shoulders the responsibility for their realization.

We know we are not alone—there are numerous peers in the media who deserve our respect. We also know that there will be a distance between the Economic Observer, its journalists, and the public’s expectations. We have always safeguarded the public's trust with pride. Together with our peers, we will continue to act according to our morals and our conscience.
 
We hope to keep ourselves pure and encourage our peers to do the same.

This article was edited by Rose Scobie and Ruoji Tang