Censoring goodness

In the past days, the Commission for Justice and Peace of Croatia’s Bishops’ Conference issued a statement by its President, Msgr. Vlado Košić, on the media and the market in Croatia. The theme of the media was addressed on several occasions in the past. In 1994 the Commission published a statement on defamation, in 1996 it expressed its stand vis à vis media censorship of public officers and in 2000 a document was released on the relationship between media and the truth. Ample excerpt of the statement follows.Market fundamentalism. “The present spirit of the times is marked, among other things, by a certain degree of reductionism that views the market as the sole ethical norm, the generator of all ‘values’, the reality which other things must be subjected to. Thus, the diagnoses of so-called ‘market fundamentalism’, understood as a secular form of exclusiveness and dominion, gain ground. The consequences of this fundamentalism have come to the fore within the ongoing economic and social crisis, that leaves desolation, fear and panic in its wake; primarily affecting the weaker and more vulnerable brackets”. “Although one would expect the media to fulfil their crucial social role, we have witnessed that editors’ and advertisers’ interests, aimed at making rapid profits in an environment of fierce competitiveness, gained priority over the readership’s rights to thorough, accurate and truthful news reports. The media are victims of corporative journalism and of all the other aspects linked to their alliance with politics and capitalism". Advertising evil. ” The primary consequence of the media’s submission to the market viewed as the unique criteria, is the sad phenomenon of ‘advertising evil’ (V. Tenžera)”, “which, being a form of complacency towards men’s baser instincts, has always been and remains the easiest and most irresponsible way of attracting the masses. […] At the same time, since the methodology of ‘advertising evil’ evidently doesn’t derive from the yearning to uncover evil, a counterproductive effect is produced. Evil thus enjoys further thrust. […] ‘Evil advertising’ method is blatant when denial is ignored. Thus, the truthful declarations denying false claims reported by the media are placed at the margins and news on evil deeds gain extensive media coverage". Our media are also affected by "the problem of the so-called ‘media-racket’ whereby institutions or individuals ask for money to ‘report the truth’ or to ‘remain silent'”. […] In the ‘alliance between politics and the media’, where money is the common denominator, conveying information is no longer the highest goal but rather a ‘collateral effect’ of the interaction of three powers: capital, the media and politics. These manipulations lead to the end of public opinion. Marginalized goodness. “If market fundamentalism and money as the primary criteria become the bases and thrust of ‘editorial policies’, we will be progressing towards an era marked by the most dangerous form of censorship: the censorship of goodness. This entails denying to the public the right to receive information on goodness, or marginalizing it, while society becomes ‘a protection racket’ where it’s one against all. Thus, the media and their owners, whose power and social responsibility are enormous, must oppose ‘market fundamentalism’ and its product, society’s ‘protection racket’ by refraining from being an active part of it. ‘Market fundamentalism’ disregards fundamental human values, censors goodness, and subordinates everything to the logics of money and profit to the point of sacrificing human dignity and the common good. In many areas of the public and private arena these phenomena have gained worrying proportions". The right to learn about the good. “There is evidently a need for an appropriate legal framework and of greater ‘publicity for the good’. At the same time it is necessary to promote and support at various levels all the initiatives apt increasing individual and public awareness in order to foster resiliency against the previously-mentioned negative phenomena and reject the censorship of the good while promoting the values that are crucial to public welfare, to institutions’ functioning and for survival. In some cases, this may entail the boycott of certain media channels. This would be more effective if promoted by media operators. Trusting the power of goodness can and must ensure the appropriate publicity of the good, i.e., the rights of the public opinion that in practice are being denied by a large part of the media”.