---

The Name Game
Thoughts on an Ethical Issue by Bob Steele

Before negotiations collapsed Wednesday in a dispute over ticket prices, The Miami Herald had been negotiating with Broward County to rename the convention center Herald Center at Greater Fort Lauderdale. The Wall Street Journal and the Herald had both published stories raising questions about the ethics of such a venture. Bob Steele, Poynter's senior faculty and head of its ethics program, suggests a framework for considering such issues:

With more of these synergistic marketing deals taking place, news organizations must:

• Be very clear about the guiding principles that underpin their journalistic mission and business enterprise.

• Insure that all marketing and promotion strategies are consistent with the organization's mission.

• Have meaningful policies and protocols in place to protect their editorial independence.

• Regularly and constructively address the tensions and potential conflicts between journalism and business values.

A newspaper has multiple roles and obligations to a range of stakeholders. A newspaper must be a:

• viable business enterprise,

• vigorous information provider,

• and vital corporate citizen.

In this particular case, the Herald, through its business deal with the Broward County government, has loyalties to:

• Readers who rely on the paper for accurate, fair, and impartial reporting.

• All citizens, even if they don't read the paper, who rely on the newspaper to serve the democratic process and who have a stake in this matter as taxpayers.

• County government officials who are in a business partnership with the paper where both stand to benefit (or perhaps if things go badly, lose) financially from this arrangement.

• Employees of the Herald, who rely on the paper to make good business and journalistic decisions that enhance the paper's credibility and serve its financial goals.

• Herald reporters who are covering Broward County government and face the challenge of providing professional coverage without being unduly influenced by the paper's significant connection to the County.

• Knight-Ridder stockholders, who rely on the Herald to produce revenue and profits that meet their expectations.

Given that range of stakeholders and their interests, there are some inevitable conflicts and competing loyalties.

Some questions I would pose in this situation:

• How well did the Herald think through this business arrangement? Who was involved in that process? What voice did editors have in the process and what concerns did they raise?

• What front-end discussions did the paper's execs have to address the inevitable tensions and likely conflicts between journalism and business values?

• Given their decision to make this business deal, what policies, guidelines, and decision-making protocols does the Herald have in place to protect editorial integrity?

Finally, how might the Herald and other media organizations look at this issue of business and journalism values? Is the current way of thinking about these matters -- using words like independence, convergence, collaboration, synergy, marketing strategies, integrity -- productive?

Many talk about the importance of "Chinese Walls" to separate the business and editorial roles of news organizations. Is that the best way to frame this challenge? What would it mean if we talked about "fences" instead of walls? How can you create the appropriate boundaries within an organization that protect principles and guard journalistic integrity while also honoring the business imperatives? How can you foster understanding and respect among employees who work in different departments, have different roles and incentives? How can you create shared values that serve multiple stakeholders?