Correlation between Corruption and Press Freedom
The interest of the public is one of the most important factors in determining many actions, including government policy, where there is need for public involvement and support. The media realizes this, and thus where there is in-depth reporting, there is bound to be pressure put on the government to act in a manner that considers the interests of the many. Corruption may be so rampant that people may perceive certain behaviors as acceptable while in a real sense, they may be corrupt. The media should step into such a situation and raise public awareness so that unacceptable behavior is exposed. The media plays an important role in ensuring that there is accountability on the part of the spending of public funds and also in the fulfillment of the duties that public officials are charged with. Rose-Ackerman (159) argues that the participation of the media inevitably activates anticorruption values that can help the public in mounting pressure on the government to be more transparent and accountable.
Many researchers have found that the media can have both tangible and intangible impacts on corruption. Tangible impacts are perceived as those that have direct consequence for example a news article or a story, such as the impeachment of a crooked official, the launching of an investigation, and the reversal of a directive or even the review of a law or policy. On the other hand, intangible impacts can be seen in a wider social context, where there may be increased debate on a given topic, improved effort on the part of public servants, political pluralism and a heightened sense of accountability in the use of public funds. There are a number of factors that determine the efficacy of the media in its watchdog role that fall into either in the legal, political or economic categories. Ownership, outreach, access to information, credibility, freedom of expression and competition are some of the clearest factors. There is a need to closely interrogate these factors so as to establish the extent to which they can be useful in reducing corruption.
There is temptation that arises from handling public funds. In many countries, mostly in Africa and Asia, public coffers are viewed as easy targets for individual enrichment. In this regard therefore, the media can be indispensable in scrutinizing the actions of those entrusted with drafting policy, overseeing budgets and spending public funds. This can be done through monitoring the processes that are involved in deciding what projects to undertake and in investigating the actual details of the spending of public funds. Many public officials have a poor attitude to the handling of public funds and have found themselves falling into temptation, using the funds to enrich themselves, an action that is tantamount to abuse of office.
| 1 | 2 | 3 | |
| Politicians getting to elective positions through bribes | .72 | ||
| Elective officers recouping investments in politics | .66 | ||
| Absence of political commitment to fight corruption | .56 | ||
| Presence of so many centers of political power | .56 | ||
| Lack of freedom of the press | .70 | ||
| A weak judiciary system | .65 | ||
| Lack of participation in decision –making | .63 | ||
| The opening up of political space in Uganda | .77 | ||
| Lack of political freedom due to party restrictions | .60 | ||
| Selection of politicians through party ideologies | .56 | ||
| % age variance | 20% | 12% | 10% |
The table above is a representation of 10 variables that were the most prominent in increased corruption in Uganda. They were sourced from different studies and were correlated for statistical significance “based on slightly different empirical specification” (Serra, 42). They were grouped into three broad categories in consideration of their economic and political effects. The first group entailed politicians who invested so much in bribing people to get to political office that they have to practice corruption to recoup their losses. The second highlights the strategic weakening of watchdog institutions key among them being the media and the judiciary and the last one entails the expanding of opportunities in Uganda translating to more avenues for corruption. Freedom of the press is one of the most significant weaknesses of the Ugandan system which if improved could have an effect on all other variables as it will avail requisite information for actions to be taken.
There are many methods that people use in order to misappropriate public funds. The tangible impacts of media influence should ensure a comprehensive manner of covering these loopholes so that there are fewer and fewer ways to carry out misappropriations. Parliament and other oversight bodies could launch investigations into matters that involve the non-transparent spending of public funds, could impeach, censure, force from office or fire people who are found to be guilty of corruption. The other arms of government can also take action, by such as the launch of judicial proceedings, or repeal policies and laws deemed to be unhelpful in the fight against corruption. The major way in which media coverage influences other bodies to act is by stirring public debate and triggering public hostility towards an unpopular outcome. The media has been found to be effective in focusing public opinion on corruption, which has led to many politicians losing favor in the eyes of the electorate. At the same time the media can mount pressure on the government to do away with unpopular policies or laws.
News items should be of high quality, in that they should inform the public using facts and not through propaganda. This means that there must be massive investment by the media to ensure that there are thorough investigations carried out regarding a particular topic. Any weaknesses and flaws that may have contributed to an act of corruption should be exposed so that corrective action can be taken to prevent further illegality. In many African countries, there have been numerous efforts that have been aimed at reforming the police, courts and anticorruption agencies to ensure that they are not responsible for encouraging corruption but rather, are at the center of eradicating it. These endeavors have resulted in: the increase in costs of behavior attributed to corruption, enhanced legitimacy of the bodies charged with oversight, increased independence of watchdog bodies, removal of conflicts of interest that might make the oversight and watchdog authorities have a vested interest in corruption and sensitizing the public to the dangers of corruption, whilst encouraging them to be more active by reporting corruption incidences and being willing to be witnesses in such cases in courts of law. There are numerous countries where people feel that the legal process is very drawn out, to the point that they become unwilling to be involved in processes that may take years to have any tangible results. Thus many cases of corruption that could be easily concluded with the culpable people being convicted, fall by the wayside due to lack of evidence and witnesses. An aggressive media may not necessarily be effective after-the-fact. There may be preemptive responses by institutions or governments eager to protect their reputations, who may move with speed to preserve their public image by responding to any corruption allegations prior to such reports being aired.
The media is indispensable in areas where there is little political competition. In many democratic societies, there are two or more sides to political competition. The winners usually form the government while the losers form the opposition. In other systems, there is little to no political competition, meaning that those in power have little to no pressure when executing their mandate. A case in point is Uganda, where the ruling class has been able to unilaterally dictate policy with little in terms of opposition. There have been numerous instances where the term of the president has been reviewed and extended, so that there is only one leader. In such a country, the media can be an important tool in ensuring that the government plays its part without misappropriating public property. Weak political competition therefore, can be compensated for through a strong, vocal and independent media. Aggressive, factual reporting can ensure that the public is informed on issues that will inevitably influence their everyday lives. The media can spark healthy public debate on the conduct of institutions or governments which the people have entrusted with their wellbeing. The media can also ensure that there is a platform for the formation of formidable opposition voices that can check governments. The end result would be political as well as economic competition that would assist in improving the lives of citizens. Increased public interest can lead to corruption networks being dismantled, enhanced accountability and the creation of incentives where public officials are empowered to deal with corruption as it arises. In undemocratic societies, a push by a vocal media might create an uprising where people become more empowered to fight for their civil liberties as well as simple freedom of expression. The media is also important due to the fact that it provides information to a large part of the population. A monopoly of information is one of the preconditions for corruption (Besley, T. & Prat, 24). By ensuring that the public is well informed, the media removes an avenue for powerbrokers which is key to increased corruption. Decisions and procedures carried out on behalf of the public are usually the preserve of a few people which means that the public is rarely aware of them. For example, where multibillion dollar projects have been planned, tendered and allocated by institutions or government for the purpose of improving facilities for better living, all the pertinent information is rarely shared with the public. When such projects therefore drag on for longer periods than scheduled and thus inevitably require more money for successful completion, vast sums may be lost. Unless the media is inquisitive and questions such issues and events on behalf of the public, there are no other means of the public getting this information, meaning that corruption will proliferate.
The freedom of media personnel to access and verify information is one the most critical factors in determining whether the media is effective. Even after information has been sourced and verified, its publication may be a major issue. In many democratic societies, the media is independent and the political powers of the day ensure that they are partners with them and not influencers (Robinson, 32). For this to be possible, the media must have financial freedom and must have resources to ensure that pertinent information regarding corruption is sourced from different areas of operation. The basic role of the media requires that it have the freedom to express itself in a manner that is professional, ethical and effective, in order to appeal, educate and inform a large number of people. The freedom of the media should be enshrined in the laws and regulations of the different jurisdictions. The extent to which the media enjoys these freedoms is therefore determined by the contents, contexts and actions deemed as appropriate by the specific laws and regulations. The government should never at any time influence the content of the information being disseminated to the public by the media. However, even where the government may not directly influence the news content, there may be other influences such as economic constraints through government policy or by private stakeholders. Additionally, the government may be oppressive in regards to the media, to the point that it is altogether gagged (Brunetti & Weder, 37). It has been found that where there is a free media sector, there are correspondingly low levels of corruption (Ahrend, 22).
Many governments, especially in Africa use a number of underhand tactics to minimize media influence. In some countries like Uganda, there are laws that are aimed at coercing the media, censuring journalists, promoting a culture of self-censorship and making it difficult for the media to be adequately funded. Colonial governments resulted to libel and sedition laws to reduce the freedom of the press and also to ensure that journalists were discriminated against in court cases. Nowadays many governments routinely cite national security as the major reason for censoring the media. They claim that some reporting is tantamount to giving terrorism and extremists a useful a platform for expressing extreme ideals. There are many countries that also make it hard for journalists to get licenses (Stevens, 18). This practice is extended to the point where their licenses could be taken away when the government deems fit. These preconditions for licensure make press freedom a pipe dream. In other states the government has control over the media, in that it is the source of subsidies and also the source of advertisements as it informs the public of its various activities. Media houses that target the government as the major source for advertising business might find themselves financially hamstrung. Threats of jail or expensive lawsuits or the revocation of licenses are some of the most common tactics used by governments to create self-censorship in the media
There is a direct relation between the level and rate of information access and the existence of corruption. Where independent media readily access information, more accountability and transparency has been witnessed. Politicians who are prone to bad conduct may be dissuaded by the presence of adequate information in the public sphere. In many countries around the world, citizens usually rely on the media to access even basic information. Therefore, the rate at which the media itself accesses pertinent information is a major determinant on the rate at which the public receives it. The media thus serves as an intermediary which primarily collects information and provides it to a large number of people who would have otherwise not have had it. If the media is denied reliable access to information, it fails in its public accountability duty (Stapenhurst, 67). There are numerous laws that are used by governments to limit the media’s access to information. Some laws refer to state secrets that are not meant to be provided to the public since they may compromise public security. These national security secrets laws are not transparent, as they may not be balanced in a manner that ensures that the public is made aware of pertinent issues whilst being protected against perceived threats. The government has a very crucial mandate to guarantee national security. However, such responsibilities must not be at the expense of press freedom. Governments usually have the discretion to determine which matters relate to national security and which do not. This power can easily be abused in a manner which undermines the mandate of the media to act as the public watchdog body. Some governments use these powers to ensure that the media remains in check through self-censorship. Criminal defamation as well as libel laws are extensively used by governments where they think that national security has been compromised. Some public officials are also protected by these laws to the extent that the media is prohibited from doing their jobs properly.
Ownership of the media is a major determinant in its freedom. Privately owned media usually leads to more accountable and transparent governments. A study of 98 countries carried out by Djankov (20), found that in countries where the media is state owned, regulations are of a lower quality than in countries where the media is privately owned. Corruption proliferates due to the government restricting the flow of information which is a major determinant in its inefficiency. One sure way of reducing inefficiency and corruption is privatization of the media and encouraging other privately owned media to join through the removal of barriers to entry. The presence of the private media provides the public with an alternative perspective and prevents state owned media from distorting information for its own benefit. Researchers however caution that the privatization of the media does not always result in lower corruption levels (Eigen, 24). In poor countries, there may be only a few entrenched entrepreneurs who own the media, meaning that they will be open to relaying information supplied by the highest bidder. These business elites might be attracted to the government as a source of advertising revenue, which may lead to them being government tools rather than independent disseminators of information. The case of Uganda shows that there are some small radio owners who depend on the government for revenue and have been used as government apologists. This has made the task of exposing corruption herculean. These private media companies have relinquished their roles as public accountability overseers and have sold out to the government. Such outcomes greatly undermine the fight against corruption, while promoting individual development albeit at the expense of the larger body of the citizenry. Up until 2013, newspapers were very vocal in Uganda against acts of corruption. They used their healthy income from sales to cover against lawsuits and also to conduct research. However, the government has gone a step further and has ordered the closure of some newspaper companies under the guise of national security.
There is need for effective and healthy competition among media houses. Suphachalasai (2005) found that increased competition in the media directly led to low levels of corruption. The researchers’ logic was that in the quest for profit maximization, media houses will inevitably compete to have the most interesting story, in order to sell more. Since the public is usually very interested in knowing how public funds are spent, competition within media houses ensures that the most sensational details about acts of corruption are published. This has been found to be more effective than the simple right of freedom of expression itself. Ultimately, competition in the media leads to governments loosening their censorship rules and regulations since they cannot use underhand tactics on a large number of media outlets. This has led to governments taking preemptive action by reviewing laws that allow for the proliferation of corruption.
Press freedom is a vital cog in the fight against corruption. Countries that have been found to have an independent, financially stable, competitive, privately owned and well-versed media have been found to have relatively lower levels of corruption. Nations that have state controlled media are the most prone to corruption, as the state inevitably distorts the information supplied to the population. The government uses a number of underhand techniques where it cannot directly control the media, such as by using libel laws and draconian laws under the guise of national security. All in all, a state that wishes to dramatically reduce corruption should begin by having a free press.
Works cited
Ahrend, R. Press Freedom, Human Capital, and Corruption, DELTA Working Paper, No. 2002-11, DELTA, 2002.
Besley, T. & Prat, A. Handcuffs for the Grabbing Hand? Media Capture and Government Accountability, London School of Economics, 2001
Brunetti, A., Weder, B. A free press is bad news for corruption, Journal of Public Economics, 87, 1801-24, 2003
Djankov, S. Who Owns the Media?, Policy Research Working Paper 2620, World Bank, 2000.
Eigen, P. The Media and the Fight Against Corruption, Transparency International, Presented to the CELAP Conference, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 1999
Robinson, M. The political economy of governance reforms in Uganda, Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex, Study commissioned by the Poverty Reduction and Economic Management (PREM) Network, World Bank, 2004, 30-3.
Rose-Ackerman, S. Corruption and Governance: causes, consequences and reform, Cambridge University Press, 1999, 143-167.
Serra, D. Empirical determinants of corruption: A sensitivity analysis. World Bank Governance and development, 2004. Accessed 19 Jan, 2014 <http://www.gprg.org/pubs/workingpapers/pdfs/gprg-wps-012.pdf>
Stapenhurst, R. The Media’s Role in Curbing Corruption. World Bank Institute, World Bank, 2000.
Stevens, J. Freedom Subject to License: Attempts to license journalists in Uganda, Zambia and other Commonwealth African Countries, ARTICLE 19, London, March, 1999, pp. 61-83.
Suphachalasai, S. Bureaucratic Corruption and Mass Media, Environmental Economy and Policy Research, Discussion Paper Series Number 05.2005, University of Cambridge.
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|
Are you looking for a similar paper or any other quality academic essay? Then look no further. Our research paper writing service is what you require. Our team of experienced writers is on standby to deliver to you an original paper as per your specified instructions with zero plagiarism guaranteed. This is the perfect way you can prepare your own unique academic paper and score the grades you deserve.
Use the order calculator below and get started! Contact our live support team for any assistance or inquiry.
[order_calculator]