The Forum > Article Comments > Ethics devil is in the detail > Comments
Ethics devil is in the detail : Comments
By Andrew Baker, published 17/5/2010Academics can do their research more effectively if universities revert to a much simpler ethics approval process.
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
-
- All
Take a functional activity such as journalism, and snotty academics look down their noses at the mere suggestion that journalists do research. But if a journalism student seeks to interview someone, then some ethics committee are now demanding they must seek ethics approval.
A requirement of the so-called ethics process is that the interviewee has the right to withdraw at any time and must be given the opportunity to review their comments.
So an interview with, say, a cabinet minister who admits he/she wants to cut Asian migration must be given a second chance to rework the words he/she initially used. In other words the ethics committees will allow interviewees to sanitise their words and be given a second chance. And if not, the comments could not be published.
Is this ethical? The ethics committees would have us believe so, even though this is clearly dishonest, deceitful and certainly not in the public interest.
Already, many editors regard journalism courses at universities as irrelevant and inadequate. Some media organisations are recruiting from high schools, and training the journalists themselves.
It's a trend that will grow, thanks, in part, to unrealistic and silly 'ethics' committees