Journalism and activist democratic theory and ethics: When the ‘chilling effects’ of libel can lose effect

Abstract

We use the events of the civil rights movement of the 1960s as context in exploring deployment of ethical principles associated with activist democratic theory by New York Times editors. The ethical framework helped shape coverage of perceived injustices against minorities and set the tenor of confrontation with public officials. Subscription to activist journalism ethics assumes a lack of fairness in liberal democratic processes that take place within unequal social, economic, and political environments. These media tend to challenge the status quo more vigorously than do other media. A content analysis shows that the Times pursued the civil rights story with an activist zeal that got it entangled in the historic Sullivan libel lawsuit of 1960. The paper did not scale back its tone in challenging the social order in the South – even in the face of physical intimidation of reporters and in spite of the widely assumed ‘chilling effects’ of libel. This suggests that when media cover certain issues in an activist spirit, conventional restraints engendered by fear of libel may lose effect.

Journalism’s Change Agents: Black Lives Matter, #BlackoutTuesday, and a Shift Toward Activist Doxa

“…The change they promoted was geared toward their industry. This finding builds on the Black press' advocacy journalism and "activist journalism ethics" (Mohamed, 2020) as seen during the 1960s, showing these journalists conceived of today's modern civil rights movement as similarly deserving of empathetic and supportive reporting, and they saw social media as the starting place for that reform.…”

“…This present study considers the actions of journalists on social media as a type of media movement, trying to achieve reform from within the system. Mohamed (2020) argued that unlike activists who work outside the system for change, journalists can follow an ethics of activism to push for change from within, similar to the way the Black press has long used journalism to pursue activist aims (Carroll, 2017; Wolseley, 1990). “Activist journalism ethics,” in the case of The New York Times in 1960, involved coverage that supported civil rights; highlighted activists’ actions and contributions; deviated from objectivity, neutrality, detachment, and balance; and pushed for social justice (Mohamed, 2020).…”

“…Mohamed (2020) argued that unlike activists who work outside the system for change, journalists can follow an ethics of activism to push for change from within, similar to the way the Black press has long used journalism to pursue activist aims (Carroll, 2017; Wolseley, 1990). “Activist journalism ethics,” in the case of The New York Times in 1960, involved coverage that supported civil rights; highlighted activists’ actions and contributions; deviated from objectivity, neutrality, detachment, and balance; and pushed for social justice (Mohamed, 2020). “Morally loaded issues” (Mohamed, 2020, p. 14)—arguably like racism—demand journalists employ activist ethics and “drop their age-old reservations about advocacy” (Ward, 2015, p. 115).…”

“…“Activist journalism ethics,” in the case of The New York Times in 1960, involved coverage that supported civil rights; highlighted activists’ actions and contributions; deviated from objectivity, neutrality, detachment, and balance; and pushed for social justice (Mohamed, 2020). “Morally loaded issues” (Mohamed, 2020, p. 14)—arguably like racism—demand journalists employ activist ethics and “drop their age-old reservations about advocacy” (Ward, 2015, p. 115).…”