The Society of Professional Journalists has issued the first in a series of position papers on significant ethical issues for the craft. One of its first two counsels how to use the existing and venerable ethics code of the organization, but the other is more ground-gaining on political involvement.

The short-form message is: Don't. As in, run, donate, organize, campaign.
,
But the longer message in the paper, written by veteran journalist Fred Brown, is that public perception is such that a journalist has to demonstrate impartiality. Political involvement won't do that, he argues.

Brown is not impractical. He notes that objectivity isn't possible but impartiality is.

Brown, who covered politics for the Denver Post for four decades, asserts the importance of noting when publishers and proprietors weigh in to politics. As for editorial positions by newspapers, he says it's fine as long as there is a sharp and defined line between news and opinion for the public to see.

One thing he finds "unnecessarily prim": not voting. "The proof of a reporter's impartiality should be in the performance."

The Jackson, New Jersey school board is proposing only to deal with reporters who violate the Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics.

It is scheduled to discuss its proposal next week. If enacted, the board's members would be enabled to decline commenting to those it feels violates the code and request that news outlets assign different reporters to cover its activities.

The Poynter Institute reports Society of Professional Journalists has dispatched a letter indicating its displeasure with the proposal, which it said is not how its code should be used. It encouraged the board to work out its differences with reporters and noted the policy would not permit any such mediation.

The Asbury Park Press indicates the board will postpone the decision while it reviews its options. 

The Society of Professional Journalists' code of ethics has been one of the benchmarks of the news industry when it establishes its own newsroom policy on conduct. But it has been 15 years since the code was changed, and unquestionably the ground has changed in that time.

Still, some documents stand the test of time and ought not to be tinkered with. To gauge the next steps, the SPJ commissioned two arguments in support of and against change.

Steve Buttry argues that the code has lost some of its relevance in the social media era, that it is no longer cited or useful as a reference in modern journalism. He makes several recommendations to supplement the principles of the code in his argument and even suggests that the principle of independence should be reviewed.

Irwin Gratz argues that the code should not be adapted to accommodate technology; rather, it should serve as a guide around which journalists should adapt. He asserts that it's a flexible, inclusive document that might seem vague but can be interpreted to good effect, and he's not so sure that Web journalism is any different and deserving of a code reflecting it.

The SPJ has asked for comments.