The Journalists Code of Honor: Between Professionalism and Bias
By Abdallah Rizq Abu Simaza
"There is no place for journalists in the field of politics," declares the code of ethics of The New York Times unequivocally. Similarly, the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) in the United States urges its members to avoid any political activities that might compromise their integrity or impartiality. These principles form the foundation for separating journalism from politics, ensuring the credibility and independence of media institutions.
However, the Code of Honor of the Sudanese Journalists’ Syndicate takes a different approach. It not only obliges journalists to uphold the principles of freedom, peace, and justice but also assigns them the duty of defending democracy, promoting good governance, and protecting a pluralistic democratic system. These provisions, some argue, risk turning the syndicate into a political entity.
In Sudan, a country grappling with intense political polarization even before the war—intensified further by the conflict—a crucial question arises: Can a journalist remain completely neutral, or is neutrality itself a political stance?
The Code of Honor places journalists in a dual challenge: adhering to professionalism while engaging in public issues to shape an informed public opinion. For instance, the first article of the Code requires journalists to commit to principles of freedom, peace, and justice, and to defend democracy and good governance. Yet, these principles, despite their importance, could be interpreted as a political orientation that might undermine the credibility of journalistic coverage, especially when reporting on related events.
Conversely, global media institutions like The New York Times have historically adhered to neutrality but made exceptions, such as during the 2016 U.S. presidential election when it openly declared Donald Trump unfit for office. Despite the hostility the newspaper faced from Trump during his first term, this rare deviation underscores the rule: neutrality is the standard.
Sudanese journalists, however, often operate in exceptional contexts. The absence of democracy and the prevalence of misgovernance have pushed journalistic movements to focus on political and civil rights, as noted by writer Mohamed Ali Khawjali in his book The Untold in Reforming Sudan’s Civil Service. This context might justify journalists involvement in political issues, provided it does not devolve into overt partisan bias.
The Code obliges journalists to defend the democratic system but does not clarify how to fulfill this duty without compromising professionalism. Lessons could be drawn from global practices, such as the "Mo Ibrahim" standards for good governance, which include 70 indicators covering various political, economic, and social dimensions. These could provide a more balanced framework between professional and ethical commitments.
Sudanese journalism faces significant challenges in achieving this balance. Emphasizing neutrality and professionalism does not necessarily mean avoiding major national issues; rather, it means covering them objectively and without bias.
Amid these challenges, it seems that the path forward for Sudanese journalism requires greater clarity in delineating professional and political commitments, ensuring the credibility of journalism as a cornerstone for supporting peace, democracy, and the development of an informed society.
