Senate Bill 1618 was introduced on Jan. 23, tucked neatly away among a raft of bills filed before this session’s deadline for new legislation. Perhaps this was by design; a bill so brazen, so ill-conceived and so odious in nature requires delicate handling.
Its title, “Relating to Journalism,” is innocuous enough, as seems its ostensible aim to graft an ethical backbone to the Fourth Estate. But make no mistake: SB 1618 is in no uncertain terms government overreach — an affront to public law that threatens to tread roughshod over rights established at our nation’s founding in apparent service to politicking.
Before bushwhacking into the weeds of SB 1618, a civics 101 refresher is warranted. The First Amendment of the Constitution reads, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” (Emphasis added). Keep those words in mind; the authors of SB 1618 certainly did not.
The bill seeks to establish and impanel by gubernatorial appointment a Journalistic Ethics Commission under the state Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs consisting of a yet-undecided number of members, who will serve a yet-undecided number of years, representing print media, broadcast television, broadcast radio, digital media and the public. A University of Hawaii journalism professor would also have a seat at the table.
So-called “traditional” print, broadcast and digital media outlets headquartered in the state would be in the purview of this commission, which would administer rules and force compliance with the code of ethics adopted by the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), and levy penalties against transgressors. Punitive measures include a public notice of noncompliance, a fine and suspension or revocation of state media privileges including access to government-sponsored events.
Bold, but in America, the government’s place is not to police what media finds worthy of reporting and how it is reported. Opportunities for corruption aside, threatening journalists has a chilling effect on the flow of information into public forums, leaving citizens without clear access to community events, knowledge and informed discourse. That is dangerous.
Freedom of the press is a tool for democracy, and a concept the Founding Fathers understood well. It must not be menaced.
Most journalists understand the profound power they wield, and self-regulate by adhering to SPJ’s industry-standard code (viewable online at 808ne.ws/ SPJCode Opens in a new tab). Government intervention is not needed, and is not welcome.
It should come as no surprise that neither SPJ’s local chapter, nor its national office, were consulted prior to SB 1618’s introduction. SPJ last week issued a firm takedown of the bill in a blog post by its ethics chair, Michael Koretzky. Stirling Morita, SPJ Hawaii Chapter president, called the bill “nonsensical,” and it is. He added, though, that it speaks to a serious problem in modern media, and it does.
Misinformation not only sows disorder and doubt, it erodes trust in news-gathering institutions. What constitutes misinformation? It depends on who you ask, and when. The term gained real traction during the COVID-19 pandemic, when right- and left-leaning outlets went back and forth on the virus’ origins, its effects and vaccine efficacy and safety.
Finding truth is hard. Whether through selective reporting, distortion or misrepresentation — deliberate or subconscious — facts can be easily coopted to suit an agenda. It is the duty of professional journalists to report facts free of overt bias, and of the public to receive reportage with due skepticism. There is no easy path to quash the scourge of misinformation, but for journalists, following an ethical code of conduct strictly and maintaining best-practice vetting and analysis are ways toward that goal.
As for government’s role in the process, there is none. Save for some ethics guidance relating to UH’s journalism program, SB 1618 is perniciously unconstitutional. One of the bill’s cosponsors is a former broadcast TV reporter; he should know better. Senior senators who cosigned are well aware of their constitutional limitations, and also should know better. This bill must be left to die.
