Much attention has been given in recent years to issues of social cohesion. However initiatives prompted by this have not always paid sufficient attention to the important role that the media can and should play in fostering better understanding between social groups. The importance and power of the media has been increasingly recognized since Burke first referred to the Fourth Estate⁽¹⁾ and is clearly recognized in Bahá’í writings. It seems clear, therefore, that the participation of the media in such initiatives could have only a marked and beneficial influence on their success. On the other hand failure to acquire media support might, at worst, prompt opposition and worsen the social dysfunction which is the very opposite of cohesion.

The mirror of the world

While governance is often equated with government, it in fact involves much more. Governance encompasses much of the way society is organised, and links and binds together the numerous elements from which society is made up. It involves the methods that formal government, non-governmental groups, community and religious organisations and the private sector integrate and co-operate to define and implement policy and to manage community resources. Media reporting and comment on this activity is an inseparable part of this social construct: media influence on public opinion will affect the success or failure of social programmes and initiatives and accordingly they share in the responsibility for the social condition. For them to discharge their share of this responsibility, effective governance requires the media to be active, free from undue influence, vibrant, above all truthful in the reporting of news. It also requires media exponents to recognise in their range of functions a social responsibility to cultivate, educate and uplift the better side of human nature.

The significance and role of the press are seen in the emphasis that the Bahá’í Faith places on accessibility to information at all levels of society. The importance and power of the press as a means of diffusing knowledge and educating the people, and its power as a civilizing force, when rightly directed, are fully recognized by Bahá'u'lláh⁽²⁾, writing some hundred and fifty years ago: “In this Day the secrets of the earth are laid bare before the eyes of men. The pages of swiftly-appearing newspapers are indeed the mirror of the world. They reflect the deeds and the pursuits of divers peoples and kindreds. They both reflect them and make them known. They are a mirror endowed with hearing, sight and speech. This is an amazing and potent phenomenon.” However such power brings responsibilities: “... it behoveth the writers thereof to be purged from the promptings of evil passions and desires and to be attired with the raiment of justice and equity. They should enquire into situations as much as possible and ascertain the facts, then set them down ....”

Reconciling this need for accuracy with the pressures imposed by deadlines, sales and ratings undoubtedly offers a challenge to those employed in today’s media, but the mature exercise of power has always required an equal demonstration of responsibility.

The opportunities to use all the presentational and programming skills and styles available to modern-day media to reinforce, complement and support initiatives to promote social cohesion and other projects that advance public well-being, are, we believe, capable of considerable development without inevitably alienating or losing target audiences.

To be just and fair-minded

The long-prevailing and jealously guarded self-view of the press and media is that of a free ‘watchdog’ defending the public interest against abuses of power, by whomsoever perpetrated. This rather adversarial perspective of press function may well have been first promulgated by utilitarian theorist James Mill: press freedom he stated: “made known the conduct of the individuals who have chosen to wield the powers of government”⁽³⁾, at all events such a view has been reiterated frequently since. Whether the balance between press and ‘wielders of power’ has remained the same since 1823 or not is matter of judgement. Nonetheless the view of the media as a watchdog seems to have been upheld by the Press Complaints Commission in 1977, in a statement which linked press freedom with democratic responsibilities: “We define the freedom of the press as the freedom from restraint which is essential to enable proprietors, editors and journalists to advance the public interest by publishing facts and opinions without which a democratic electorate cannot make responsible judgements”. Such perceptions presume to a great deal of moral authority, beg the question quis custodiet ipsos custodies (who guards the guards?), and are most plausible when those concerned are themselves beyond reproach. Freedom from restraint in this context we believe should mean restraint by others rather than imply unbridled licence, and the perceptions touch on what has been described as the clash of two great forces: “the force of freedom and the force of responsibility”⁽⁴⁾.

While the vital role of the press in reporting and reflecting world events and current opinions should be upheld and defended, it is fair to express concern about the deterioration of standards in some sections of the press.

The destructively critical attitude of some sections of the media toward many within the community and its institutions, voiced often in highly intemperate, sensational and extravagant language; an apparently obsessive wish to expose and publish widely whatever shortcomings that the community, its institutions or prominent individuals may have had - indifferent to the consequences; an almost hourly outpouring of accusations, indictments and abuse; and clear attempts to prompt and change public opinion to bring pressure to bear on government and other institutions to make changes in their policies and practices; these are all accusations that have been levied from time to time against the media and press.

To whatever degree such opinions are valid or truly represent the methods of the media in present-day public life, it might be asked (given the vital role of the media in public life) if the democratic electorate is always being fully enabled to make responsible judgments and whether the real interest of the public is always being served. Whatever the case may be, the role of the media and its potential for good or harm is too important for its product to be accepted without the same critical analysis it itself applies to other sections of society.

While advocacy of self restraint and self control may be dismissed as a desire to restrict individual liberty and interfere with natural human instincts, the alternative seems to be the condoning of a continued withering of social controls, toleration of extreme forms of aberrant behaviour in the name of civil rights, and an acceptance of degeneracy and violence - a condition approaching moral anarchy in a society suspicious of authority and lacking bonds of trust.

The Bahá’í teachings relating to social intercourse prize some qualities which are especially relevant to the media: “courtesy, reverence, dignity, respect for the rank and achievements of others are virtues which contribute to the harmony and well-being of every community”.⁽⁵⁾ However, while the Bahá'í writings elevate respect, dignity and reverence to a high station and describe courtesy as the prince of virtues, they contrast them with “frivolity and facetiousness, ribaldry and effrontery”. ⁽⁵⁾ These last all-too-prevalent qualities - finding expression in studied confrontation and intemperate comment - foment mistrust and disdain for society rather than promoting harmony, well-being and the public interest. These comments should not be seen as advocating an uncritical and submissive role for the media. However we believe they are relevant to the manner in which the media fulfils its duties.

Summoned to a noble calling

The Bahá’í writings are clear on the role of the media: for the media to contribute as they can to the well-being and cohesion of society, they should give full scope to the expression of the diversified views and convictions of mankind and guard against the influence of, and manipulation by, vested interests, whether private or public. Those responsible for production of the press and other media should recognise an inescapable duty to be free from malice, passion and prejudice, to be just and fair-minded, to be painstaking in their inquiries, and to make every effort to ascertain all the facts in every situation. “Beware lest any soul should ... cause disruption or stir up strife”⁽⁵⁾ is the admonition in Bahá’í scripture.

Those employed in the media should be conscious of a responsibility to help people understand that diversity need not be a source of conflict; rather that it can serve to promote a wider and more tolerant vision of the world in which we live today. They can do so by giving greater attention to those constructive, unifying, and cooperative undertakings that prove humanity's capacity to work together to meet the enormous challenges facing it. The media’s great potential for good when campaigning to right some wrong, achieve justice for the victim or abused, or promote charitable undertakings, has proved time and again beyond measure. In an anxiety-haunted and distrustful society this capacity is much needed and needs to be encouraged at every opportunity. “Allow not the abject to ... dominate them who are noble and worthy of honour, and suffer not the high-minded to be at the mercy of the contemptible and worthless”⁽⁵⁾ is the plea of Bahá’u’lláh.

A recent example of how this function can be fulfilled is a project undertaken under the auspices of the Royaumont Process of the European Union, carried out by the Bahá'í International Community. In a multiyear moral education initiative aimed at promoting ethnic harmony and social cohesion in several countries in South-eastern Europe, through a unique drama-based interactive television and radio programme designed to explore moral and ethical issues, the Bahá'í International Community has conducted training seminars for educators, media representatives, journalists, and non-governmental organizations.

The programme has become popular with both the public and government officials in providing examples on how to approach life problems by finding positive solutions. Developing constructive ways of overcoming inter-group conflict and prejudice have been a principal theme of the initiative. The success of training seminars in Albania, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Croatia, Hungary, Romania and Slovenia has led to several follow-up projects. Radio and television programs in Croatia and Bulgaria, as well as primary education curricula in Romania, are now using the techniques of the show to demonstrate how morality is central to the question of social stability and prosperity. The format has also been adapted for use in values education programs in Finland, Italy, Russia, Sweden, Moldova, Norway, and Malaysia⁽⁶⁾. The experience of this programme could be made available in this country if it were to be sought.

The very soul of the world

Bahá’í writings are clear as to the indispensability of the press in modern society. Fulfilling the potential of which they are capable, the media can be the “dynamic power in the arteries of life”, “the very soul of the world”⁽⁵⁾. For most people, whatever their social circle and other contacts, the media - press, radio and television (and now internet) - remain by far and away the most influential factor in the formation of their opinions and world view. As a significant contributor to the formation of current standards and values the media cannot stand back from responsibility for social mores and the social condition: the potential of the media to contribute to improving the human condition is immense. By the same token there is an equal responsibility to invite and ensure greater media participation, involvement and contribution to social programmes and initiatives. Where this has been done success has invariably been the greater.

The Bahá’í teachings offer clearly stated criteria by which the media may assess its role and function. Addressed to the press, they apply with equal validity to the media as a whole. It is our hope that the media will resolve and be encouraged to participate ever more fully to the fostering of understanding, the promotion of high standards of behaviour and the well-being of the whole human race, for they are summoned to a noble calling:

“A newspaper must in the first instance be the means of harmony between the people. This is the prime duty of the proprietors of newspapers to obliterate misunderstandings betwixt religions and races and nativities, and promote the oneness of mankind”. ⁽⁷⁾ “Newspapers must be the first means of amity and understanding amongst men. Newspapers must be the heralds of the oneness of humanity”⁽⁸⁾.

Endnote

1.		Edmund Burke (1729 - 1797), quoted in Thomas Carlyle's book, "Heros and Hero Worship in History" (1841): "Burke said that there were three Estates in Parliament, but in the Reporters Gallery yonder, there sat a fourth Estate more important far than they all." The ‘three estates’ referred to the British parliament: the Lords Temporal, the Lords Spiritual and the Commons.
2.		Bahá’u’lláh (1817-1892), Prophet Founder of the Bahá’í Faith.
3.		James Mill (1773-1836), author of "Liberty of the Press" (1823), quoted in John C Merrill, “The Dialectic in Journalism: Toward a Responsible Use of Press Freedom“, Lousiana State University Press (1989).
4.		John C. Merrill, “A Yet-Unreconstructed Libertarian”, Association for Education in Journalism and Mass Communication - Civic Journalism Interest Group News, Fall 1998 John C. Merrill is Professor Emeritus at the University of Missouri School of Journalism.
5.		Quotations from Bahá’í writings.
6.		cited in “Overcoming Corruption and Safeguarding Integrity in Public Institutions: a Bahá’í Perspective” a statement presented by the Bahá'í International Community at the Intergovernmental Global Forum on Fighting Corruption II, The Hague, Netherlands, 28-31 May 2001
7.		‘Abdu'l-Bahá, (1844-1921) eldest son of Bahá’u’lláh, speaking to a newspaper proprietor in Minneapolis during his visit to America, cited in HM Balyuzi, “’Abdu’l-Bahá: the Centre of the Covenant”, George Ronald, (1971) p273.
8.		op cit, p275

April 2004 CE