According to today's New York Times:
Thomas Friedman, the star columnist, returned a $75,000 speaking fee after accepting it from a California government agency in violation of a Times guideline. Maureen Dowd, another star columnist, was roughed up on the Internet for using a paragraph from a blogger without attribution. And Edmund Andrews, an economics writer, began promoting a memoir describing how he took out subprime mortgages he couldn't possibly repay even as he covered the subprime mess — including efforts to help homeowners in danger of default, like him.
The Times has a strict policy that everything that goes into the paper follows strict standards. This is an expensive policy but it guarantees journalistic independence, not just proclamations about journalist ethics.
Robert Parker has also written about his journalist ethics for the Wine Advocate. Apparently, the Wine Advocate is divided between two groups. First, there is Robert Parker the owner who will not accept trips, junkets or any form of bribery.
There is now a second category at the Wine Advocate called independent contractors who are expected to be rigorously independent but who can accept money for trips and hospitality. Mr. Parker writes: I do permit these writers to accept free airline travel and related but limited hospitality, but only for the purposes of education involving geography, geology, and lay of the vineyards in their areas of responsibility, or to speak at wine conferences.
What is fuzzy about the distinction between these two categories is that Parker used to write the Wine Advocate by himself. Then, he added Pierre Rovani, who I believe followed the same ethics standards at Parker. Now that he has a larger staff, he is making the ethics somewhat looser. Jay Miller has gone on government tours in South America and Australia, as did Mark Squires in Israel and Greece. A paid tour is money in the pocket, pure and simple.
I'm truly disappointed that Mr. Parker decided to not demand the same ethical standards of the Wine Advocate staff that he demands of himself. "Independent Contractors" is a legal and tax category, Parker is the publisher who determines the policies. I hope he reconsiders.
Perhaps The New York Times could call their writers "independent contractors" employed by the Ochs-Sulzberger trust. This way they could avoid a lot of expense and let the independent contractors have fun. The current policy at the Times is:
Staff members may not accept free or discounted transportation and lodging except where special circumstances give little or no choice. Such special cases include certain military or scientific expeditions and other trips for which alternative arrangements would be impractical — for example, an interview aboard a corporate jet where there is no benefit other than the interview. Journalists should consult responsible newsroom managers in advance when special circumstances arise.
But what would Ralph Nader have thought of a New York Times staff on junkets? Yes, everyone can argue that their journal or their newsletter or their blog does not have the financial resources of The Times. But maintaining journalistic ethics is as important for the lonely freelancer and blogger as it is for large organizations. With so much information now available on the web, don't writers owe the public an honest point of view, free of bribery and monetary corruption?