Our Code of Ethics: We're All in this Together

"Farmers are much more aware of advertiser influence on editorial content than we might think." -- Karen Simon, ethics committee co-chair

Recently I received a call from an AAEA member, a long-time leader in our organization, who had a rather knotty question about advertising side expectations for sponsored email newsletters.

A couple weeks earlier, a colleague asked me about the ethics of accepting a certain kind of speaking engagement. He had looked through the AAEA code and found nothing that seemed to address the situation precisely. Some AAEA members who have recently received stipends have donated them to the AAEA Professional Improvement Foundation.

Other ethics questions I've heard raised recently have to do with the perceived differences in the lines between advertising and editorial in various media. Is the editorial role somehow different in non-print media -- in radio, for example? Quite a number of us are now involved in video, radio and Web work, as well as print. Shouldn't our ethical stance be consistent from one medium to another?

Our code of ethics was revised in 2006, in part to address a growing concern that the lines between editorial and advertising were blurring in new media. Other issues on the forefront were advertiser-paid trips, gifts from marketing communications agencies, and proper labeling of advertorials.

The updated ethics code brought immediate benefits. For one thing, there was open discussion of these issues at the 2006 Agricultural Media Summit (AMS) in Portland, Ore. The panel presentation at the annual meeting that year enabled editorial, agribusiness, and agency people to talk openly about media ethics. That session played before a packed room, and you could almost feel the weight of previously unaired concerns lifting from people's shoulders.

Also, it was beneficial that the AAEA board, upon recommendation of the ethics committee, adopted the "preferred practices" of the American Business Media (ABM) organization, the professional group of our publishers. The logic has proved sound, I think: In addressing ethics questions with our code, editors can state that they are simply following the publishers' own policies.

While the 2006 revisions were a big step forward for our organization, it's clear that ethics questions have not disappeared from our daily routines. Our business keeps evolving, and the industry's players continue to change.

The Portland session proved it is healthy to get these issues out in the open. Going forward it would seem wise to keep ethics topics a major part of our coverage in The ByLine and annual meeting programming.

And, it certainly helped me to give the new code a quick re-reading recently. It's brief -- a mere three pages -- and clearly worded. A good understanding of these provisions may make your life easier the next time an ethics issue crops up in your shop.

In thinking through the history of AAEA's efforts to address ethics issues in our industry, I recently interviewed Karen Simon, co-chair of the ethics committee and an active member of AAEA for many years. Karen wrote her masters degree thesis on ethics in agriculture and was a presenter on the ethics panel at the 2006 AMS.

JW: Karen, what do you feel we accomplished with the 2006 revisions?

KS: By revising the code of ethics, we accomplished several things. First, we brought a new awareness of ethics to the industry. Second, we addressed some concerns by adopting a code that was more specific. (Examples are the guidelines for ag journalists to avoid influence and the labeling guidelines for advertorials.) Third, by adopting the publishers' code we aligned ourselves with others in the industry. This is crucial, because in order to make a difference we must all work together to protect the integrity of our agricultural publications.

JW: Regarding your masters thesis, what were a couple of its most significant findings?

KS: My thesis looked at the influence of advertising on editorial content and examined ways to develop ethical accountability for ag journalists. In my opinion, the most important finding is that farmers are much more aware of advertiser influence on editorial content than we might think. Second was the awareness that it isn't just the editor's responsibility to uphold ethical standards, it's everyone's responsibility, industry-wide. Protecting trustworthy and unbiased ag publications is in everyone's best interest.

JW: Are you aware of any specific cases that have cropped up in which our new code has been useful?

KS: I've heard of several examples recently. In one case, a major agricultural publication found that having a more specific code of ethics provided the editorial staff with another tool to use when faced with unethical demands from the advertising department. One of the editors there believes most publications have thought about ethics a lot more in the past year. However, he also said that with the fierce competition between publications for advertising dollars, it's even more crucial to stand united when it comes to journalistic ethics, because if one publication caves in to the pressure, the rest soon follow.

In another case, a major equipment manufacturer has seen a change in the way publications behave since the ethics discussion began last year, noting that some agencies have changed their proposals to make sure their ideas don't violate the new code of ethics.

And, I've heard that a crop chemical company has pledged not to place advertisements in publications that engage in unethical practices.

JW: What issues remain for us regarding ethics?

KS: Loren [Kruse, co-chair] and I hope to build on the groundwork laid this past year to continue to create opportunities for education and awareness, both within AAEA and throughout the industry. There has also been interest in developing a code of ethics that would address issues faced by affiliate members.

The steps taken to adopt a new code of ethics and raise awareness of ethical issues are a positive first step. However, one is never done when it comes to this issue. Ethics is an ever-evolving process, and we must continue our work in this area.

John Walter is director of multimedia at Successful Farming/Agriculture Online. You can reach him at 515-284-2802 or john.walter@meredith.com