Media ethics

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Media ethics examines the relationship between media expression and human behavior. It reflects on alternative action concepts, which can be used to evaluate the quality and appropriateness of media action.

object

"Media ethics pursues the task of formulating and justifying rules for responsible action in the production , distribution and reception of media in order to implement ethically required self-commitments of the professional groups, industries and individuals involved in the media process and to take account of the public's responsibility" , the recipient .

Ethics and morals

A distinction must be made between the concept of media ethics and the “ morality ” of the media, which is about what is considered normal, morally required and desired - or what is unusual, reprehensible and unacceptable. Norms of behavior and attitudes are considered “morally” or “morally good” if they have been officially and by the majority regarded as binding in a culture , group or society over a longer period of time. So are many declarations of self-commitment, u. a. also the press code of the German press council and the so-called code of ethics for multimedia journalists - an expression of moral principles.

The term “media ethics” in the narrower sense, on the other hand, denotes the (scientific) investigation of morality - ethics is therefore the “reflection theory of morality”. Philosophical ethics asks how moral principles are justified, whether these justifications are sound and which moral beliefs can be justified.

Definition of the term "media"

It did not facilitate the establishment of media ethics that the term " media " is sometimes very broad. It can then include everything that can be an intermediary - “from means of transport as the media of mobility to money and power as the corresponding media for social action, telephone and fax as media for communicating speech and / or images in personal communication to newspapers, film and television as 'anonymous' intermediaries who do not require direct personal contact ”.

Such a broadly defined media term may be appropriate for media studies studies; the specific subject of media ethics is thereby rather concealed. "This does not have to do with all media or any kind of communication , but only with a subset, namely those communication acts that are mediated by mass media ."

The definition of mass communication most widely used in communication studies comes from Gerhard Maletzke (1963). He first distinguished between different types of communication: direct and indirect, mutual and one-way, and private and public communication. According to Maletzke, mass communication is a form of public, indirect and one-sided communication that uses technical means of dissemination and is addressed to a broad audience.

These “technical means of dissemination” are what has been understood by “mass media” until the very recent past: daily newspapers and magazines , radio , television and cinema , records / CDs , videos / DVDs and books . Recently, these have been joined by communication with the help of digital media and via the Internet , although this is usually treated under a separate term - " information ethics" , " Internet ethics" or "digital ethics" - because the computer is viewed as a "hybrid medium".

Media ethics - an area ethics

If an area ethics is to be regarded as an independent discipline within the framework of “applied” or “application-related” ethics, at least two criteria must be met in order to distinguish it from general ethics: it must define a specific subject area with its own problems and questions. Secondly, it must be able to develop special standards that enable solutions to special problems.

Applied ethics are only legitimized when they feel responsible for problems for which general ethics cannot provide adequate ethical norms, so that new values ​​and norms have to be developed, to which they have to contribute.

The first criterion of one's own area for media ethics is the limiting definition of the term “ media ”. If one were to stay on a level that is characterized by the anthropological view of man as an “ animal symbolicum ” - man is the being that is determined by the use of signs and media - then every type of communication would be the subject of media ethics . Then there would be no independent media ethics, but only general communication ethics .

The necessity of area ethics or application ethics ( technical ethics , bio and medical ethics , environmental ethics , business ethics ) has always been shown "when new possibilities for action and with them new evaluation problems arose due to scientific and technical developments." This was the case in each case for media ethics in the emergence of the press , radio and television , most recently and continuously in the development of digital media .

Theory type

It is controversial whether media ethics should primarily be viewed as descriptive or normative ethics . In the first case, it asks what is considered morally justified in media practice. “It describes human behavior under media conditions. It gives less answers to the question of what we should do in the face of the new changed conditions of action, than rather to what we have to consider when acting under media changed conditions. ”With a normative approach, media ethics assesses media practice itself and asks what values ​​and standards should reasonably apply here. “Your task is not limited to checking the standards you have submitted. In the event that these do not pass the test, it is also concerned with improving them or developing more suitable candidates. "

Reference points of media ethics

Virtue ethics

Virtue ethics of ancient philosophy (especially Plato and Aristotle ) understand ethically correct action as a good life according to certain virtues , which leads to happiness ( eudaimonia ). In this context, the value-oriented journalism of Hermann Boventer should be mentioned in media ethics : "I would like a journalism that constantly asks itself what it means for people and their freedom". From the perspective of the recipient , Hermann Lübbe argues , who assumes that without the cardinal virtue of moderation , we will be drowned in the flood of information and entertainment. Excessive media consumption has a destructive effect and makes you incapable of freedom.

Deontological ethics

Deontological ethics , (duty ethics ), including those of Kant , aim at good action, with those acting of their own free will to undertake the right thing to do. In the case of an action, it must be checked whether the “subjective principle of will” (Kant) can apply universally . The moral value of an act is based in itself, and the goodwill is already morally valuable, regardless of the consequences of the act. There are many deontological approaches in the ethics of traditional (mass) media. You ask about principles of action according to which good media behavior can be judged, e.g. B. press codes , the Codex for Multimedia - journalists or the code of ethics of the (Austrian) advertising industry.

Utilitarian ethics

A utilitarian ethic (including Jeremy Bentham , John Stuart Mill ) judges an action according to the greatest possible benefit for those affected or the general public (“the greatest possible number”). Utility thus becomes the decisive criterion by which the moral correctness of an action has to be proven. Utilitarian ethics is teleological (telos = goal), ie the results of an action are decisive. Utilitarian media ethics also come into play when assessing the consequences; but because the consequences of one's own media actions are difficult to assess, a consistently utilitarian approach in media ethics is difficult to maintain.

Contract models

Contract models : Rawls' theory of justice was instrumental in breaking the dominance of utilitarianism in the Anglo-Saxon world. Rawls falls back on the early modern contract model to justify his position and comes to a moderately welfare state- liberal concept of the state . It is based on two principles of justice: Everyone has an equal right to fundamental freedoms that are compatible with freedoms for all. Social and economic inequalities can only be tolerated if they are either linked to offices and positions that are open to everyone under the conditions of fair equality of opportunity , or if they serve the greatest advantage of the worst-off member of society (principle of difference). In media ethics, considerations of contract theory play just as much a role in the fundamentals of media regulations as they do in the formulation of codes.

Discourse ethics

The discourse ethics ( Habermas ) is an ethics of principles in the sense of Kant's ethics . Such an ethic sees its task initially in the formulation and justification of a single principle, the moral principle. This allows us to check all action orientations to see whether they are morally correct. And it commands us to act in the manner recognized as correct. According to Habermas, “a standard can only claim validity if all those who may be affected by it as participants in a practical discourse achieve (or would achieve) consent that this standard applies.” So it does not provide any clarification of the content, but is concerned with the moral principle of discourse ethics around a 'formal' or 'procedural' principle. In media ethics, Habermas' approach can be used wherever actors in a media area agree on the quality of their work, but it can also help to agree on rules in public discourse .

Systems theory

Systems-theoretical considerations focus less on the individual than on the media as part of the social system. This is primarily about the ethical responsibility of media companies (and less about the individual media workers). This approach particularly examines the ethical responsibility of legislators and media owners.

Constructivist ethics

Constructivist ethics , on the other hand, focus precisely on the question of the responsibility of the individual. Since everyone constructs their own reality , they also have to take full responsibility for it. The prerequisites and premises of ethical and moral action are correspondingly the freedom of decision of the individual and the willingness for permanent reflection and productive (self) insecurity. "Presumably, this ideal of the responsible, competent and responsibly acting counterpart is without any reasonable alternative, if and as long as ethics is discussed."

responsibility

One of the key ethical concepts is responsibility . 'Responsibility' originally came from the sphere of jurisdiction and goes back to corresponding expressions in Roman law : “A person is responsible for something by having to answer a question about what he has done before a judge; because a certain act and its consequences are attributed to him. ”In the 20th century, the sociologist Max Weber formulated in his lecture“ Politics as a Profession ”as a socio-ethical obligation“ that one has to pay for the (predictable) consequences of his actions ”. Weber put the “responsibility” of the politician in opposition to the “ethics of conviction” of the saint, a person who is enthusiastically fixated on a world-detached figure of the good. Rüdiger Funiok recommends differentiating the question of responsibility:

"1. Who is responsible? (Agent);
2. What is responsible for? (Action);
3. What is he responsible for? (Consequences);
4. To whom is he responsible? (Affected);
5. What does he have to answer for? (Authority, e.g. conscience, public);
6. Why do you have to answer? (Values, norms, criteria). "

Media ethics does not work with the pointed concept of responsibility of Hans Jonas , which is used a lot in the bio- and technology-political debate and aims to provide an answer to the specifically new ethical challenges of 'technological civilization': the threat to the entire biosphere from human activity and the expanding range and increasing depth of intervention of technical manipulations. In the media sector, it is not easy to answer the question about the responsibility of the actors: “Who is to be held responsible in the process of creating and disseminating media offers in the division of labor? Is it the individual producers, is it the institutions or the structures of the media system? ”Also with regard to the consequences of action, one can only grasp responsibility if one starts out not only from individual but from“ corporate responsibility ”.

In the context of journalists' political responsibility, the question is often asked how neutral journalists report politically. Accusations are directed against the media that describe social criticism as politically left-wing and speak of the lying press in this context . An international study by the Zurich University of Applied Sciences (ZHAW) asked journalists about their political attitudes. The majority of SRG journalists assess their political stance as “left”. This does not differ significantly from journalists in the private media. The evaluation of the data collected as part of an international journalism study between 2014 and 2016 shows that almost 70 percent of all SRG journalists describe themselves as left-wing. 16 percent locate themselves in the political center, 16 percent see themselves as right-wing. None of the SRG journalists identified themselves on the far right, but 7.4 percent see themselves on the far left. Journalism researcher Vinzenz Wyss comments on this: “Journalism addresses social conflicts, irritations, and the prevailing balance of power is questioned.” The newspaper continues to refer to him: “The journalistic criticism and control function probably correlates more closely with left-wing socio-political ideas . "

Media literacy

In connection with a discussion about the responsibility of media users, the term “ media competence ” is often brought into play. The recipients would have to show competent handling of media offers. However, this requirement is usually not so much aimed at the media ethical competence of the user, but first and foremost on technical skills: the use of a computer or the competence to use search engines effectively on the Internet, to defend oneself against malware, etc. The ability to make a sensible selection from the variety of media offers and to use the selected content appropriately is also counted. It is more about a cultural competence - media ethics only comes into play with the requirement to use media in such a way that the user does not harm himself or others. In most cases, no special media ethics are necessary because the simple application of a general ethic is sufficient. For the recipients, there is a close connection between cultural and ethical competencies. For example, one has to know the suggestive power of images in order to be able to deal with them appropriately and not without reflection. B. to succumb to the promises of happiness of advertising.

Streams of media ethics in Germany

Depending on which general understanding of ethics the authors follow, the media ethical concepts also turn out very differently. In Germany one can initially observe a media-skeptical attitude, which is mostly fed by longings looking backwards and which is brought forward in the context of criticism of modernity. Their demands are mostly aimed at restricting media communication. It develops from a movement against popular fiction ( " pulp fiction ") and the so-called. Cinema reform movement and extends beyond the concept of "Film Education" of the 1950s and into the present. The allegations are that media content leads to a general moral primitivation, sexualization and criminalization. The media led to a social destabilization, a decline in values, a "destruction of the socio-moral foundations of society" ( Werner Glogauer ).

On the other hand, a left-emancipatory concept has developed since the 1970s that goes back to critical theory ( Theodor W. Adorno , Jürgen Habermas ), which outlines its critique of modernity as a “critique of instrumental reason ” ( Horkheimer ). The main accusation is that the (mass) media , especially the tabloid , film and advertising , are manipulating people . The media had become the pillars of the instrumental system , served to maximize profits and to veil power . The aim of such media ethics is a politically mature handling of the media and its use for changing the political awareness (H. Giffhorn). Current media ethical currents take up both strands, but do not offer an independent, but rather a very differentiated picture. First of all, efforts can be recognized that are primarily based on individual ethics and aristotelian - virtue ethical arguments. The subject area is mostly journalistic ethics , ie the informational function of the media; The aim is to establish a journalistic ethos ( truth , transparency , fairness , respect, etc.) - the main representative is Hermann Boventer . Other authors try to develop a media ethics from Habermas' discourse ethics (Bernhard Laux, Walter Lesch , Edmund Arens ).

In contrast to the individual ethical approaches, there are theories that tie in with Luhmann's systems theory or seek a structural ethical approach (Th. Hausmanninger, Th. Bohrmann ) and analyze ethical norms on three levels: the legal framework ( constitution , statutory order ), institutionalized self-commitment (industry-specific codes ) and the individual (professional) ethos . Also to be mentioned are radical constructivism (SJ Schmidt), semiotics (P. Grimm) or “digital ontology” ( Rafael Capurro ).

Applications today

Under the terms “cyber ethics” and “ information ethics” , concepts are currently emerging that focus on computer communication. It examines ethical questions that specifically concern the use of computers and computer networks. So it's about the aspects: computers in the workplace, computer / cyber crime, protection of privacy and intellectual property / plagiarism. In view of the rapid development of the Internet, the question arises of how ethical standards can be developed in the global network and which theoretical foundations can be considered viable in the digital space? (Hausmanninger, Capurro) It remains to be seen whether the communication structures of the new "medium" Internet call into question the results obtained so far.

Mike Sandbothe, for example, argues that due to different basic structures than traditional mass media such as newspapers or television, new problems and new questions arise, especially in the area of ​​tension between freedom and responsibility. A pragmatic concept is appropriate for questions of internet ethics, the "traditional ethics concept", which is based on the validity of universal moral principles ( Immanuel Kant , John Stuart Mill and Jürgen Habermas ), which cross cultures and epochs, is not suitable for internet ethics ; ethical rules would have to prove themselves again and again in practice.

Do algorithms threaten the freedom of public communication? How to deal with “Big Data”? These are current questions in this context.

Another field in which media ethics is required today is image ethics . In view of the sheer number of three billion photos that, according to a survey by a Korean electronics company, are "shot" per month in Germany alone, of which eleven percent, i.e. around 330 million, reach the Internet within 60 seconds and are "the journey around the globe" the question of how to deal with this medium arises. The responsible handling of private photos on the internet (especially of children), the handling of press photography in crisis situations, the measure of authenticity as the legitimation of journalistic photography and the possibilities of image manipulation (“ fake ”) are some of the challenges facing media / image ethics . Another topic relates to the tension between professional journalism and weblogs ("blogs") - "Watch blogs as watchdogs?"

Other current fields of application (as of early 2016) are the topics of propaganda and war reporting , e.g. B. in connection with Ukraine reporting , the protection of personal rights and the alleged credibility crisis of journalism (" lying press ").

Well-founded media ethics must, however, go beyond such aspect and case-related discussions and raise the question of structural conditions and scope for action for those involved in the media. Deficits can still be identified here; Most authors unanimously complain about a “theoretical deficit” in media ethics.

literature

  • Horst Avenarius , Günter Bentele (Hrsg.): Self-control in the professional field of public relations. Reflections and Documentations. Wiesbaden 2009, ISBN 978-3531163109 .
  • Achim Baum, Wolfgang R. Langenbucher, Horst Pöttker, Christian Schicha (eds.): Handbook of media self-control. Wiesbaden 2005. ISBN 978-3531150161
  • Hermann Boventer: Ethics of Journalism. On the philosophy of media culture. Constance 1984. ISBN 978-3879402489
  • Hermann Boventer (Ed.): Media and Moral. Unwritten rules of journalism. Konstanz 1988. ISBN 978-3879403219
  • Hermann Boventer: Freedom of the press is not unlimited. Introduction to media ethics. Bonn 1989. ISBN 978-3-416-02201-9
  • Bernhard Debatin, Rüdiger Funiok (ed.): Communication and media ethics. Basics - Approaches - Applications. Konstanz 2003. ISBN 978-3896693716
  • Christian Drägert, Nikolaus Schneider: Media ethics. Freedom and responsibility. Stuttgart; Zurich 2001. ISBN 978-3783119800
  • Freimut Duve, Michael Haller (ed.): Mission statement independence. For the security of journalistic responsibility. Constance 2004. ISBN 978-3896694607
  • Lutz Erbring, Stephan Ruß-Mohl, Berthold Seewald (eds.): Media without morals. Variations on Journalism and Ethics. Berlin 1988. ISBN 978-3870247041
  • Birgit Förg: Morals and ethics in PR. Basics - theoretical and empirical analyzes - perspectives. Wiesbaden 2004. ISBN 978-3531141473
  • Rüdiger Funiok (ed.): Basic questions of communication ethics. Constance 1996. ISBN 978-3896691774
  • Rüdiger Funiok: Media Ethics. Responsibility in the media society. Stuttgart 2007. ISBN 978-3170199583
  • Rüdiger Funiok, Udo F. Schmälzle, Christoph H. Werth (eds.): Media ethics - the question of responsibility. Bonn 1999. ISBN 978-3893313761
  • Rudolf Gerhardt, Hans-Wolfgang Pfeifer (ed.): Who guards the media. Media freedom and its limits in an international comparison. Contributions to media ethics. Volume 5. Frankfurt am Main 2000. ISBN 978-3932194399
  • Joachim von Gottberg, Elisabeth Prommer (Ed.): Lost Values? Media and their development of ethics and morals. Constance 2008. ISBN 978-3867641036
  • Andreas Greis: Identity, Authenticity and Responsibility. The ethical challenges of communication on the Internet. Munich 2001. ISBN 978-3935686037
  • Andreas Greis, Gerfried W. Hunold, Klaus Koziol (Eds.): Media ethics. Tübingen and Basel 2003. ISBN 978-3825223700
  • Michael Haller , Helmut Holzhey (eds.): Media ethics. Descriptions, analysis, concepts for German-language journalism. Opladen 1994, ISBN 978-3531123059 .
  • Thomas Hausmanninger , Rafael Capurro (ed.): Netzethik. Fundamental questions of an internet ethics. Munich 2002. ISBN 978-3770537471
  • Jessica Heesen (Hrsg.): Handbook Media and Information Ethics Stuttgart - Weimar 2016. ISBN 978-3476053947
  • Adrian Holderegger (Ed.): Communication and media ethics. Interdisciplinary perspectives. Freiburg i. Ue. (Switzerland); Freiburg i. Br., 3rd edition 2004. ISBN 978-3451271885
  • Institute for the Promotion of Young Journalists, German Press Council (Ed.): Ethics in everyday editorial work. Constance 2005. ISBN 978-3896694690
  • Gregor M. Jansen: People and Media. Draft of an ethics of media reception: Frankfurt am Main 2003. ISBN 978-3631512913
  • Matthias Karmasin: The Oligopoly of Truth. Media company between economy and ethics. Vienna; Cologne; Weimar 1993. ISBN 978-3205981664
  • Matthias Karmasin (ed.): Media and ethics. Stuttgart 2002. ISBN 978-3150181881
  • Rainer Kuhlen: Information ethics. Handling knowledge and information in electronic spaces. Constance 2004. ISBN 978-3825224547
  • Larissa Krainer : Media and Ethics. For the organization of media-ethical decision-making processes. Munich 2001. ISBN 978-3935686020
  • Rainer Leschke: Introduction to media ethics. Munich 2001. ISBN 978-3825222505
  • Volker Lilienthal (Ed.): Professionalization of media supervision. New tasks for broadcasting councils - The committee debate in epd medien. Wiesbaden 2009. ISBN 978-3531162782
  • Christian Müller: Media, Power and Ethics. The self-image of individuals in media culture. Wiesbaden 2001. ISBN 978-3531137070
  • Michael Müller: Investigative journalism. Its justification and limitation from the point of view of Christian ethics. Münster 1997. ISBN 978-3825834708
  • Julian Nida-Rümelin (ed.): Applied ethics. The area ethics and their theoretical foundation. A manual (= Kröner's pocket edition . Volume 437). Kröner, Stuttgart 1996, ISBN 3-520-43701-5 .
  • Anika Pohla: Media Ethics. A critical orientation. Frankfurt am Main 2006. ISBN 978-3631553053
  • Matthias Rath (Ed.): Media ethics and media impact research. Wiesbaden 2000. ISBN 978-3531134642
  • Perry Reisewitz (Ed.): Freedom of the press under pressure. Dangers, cases, backgrounds. Wiesbaden 2008. ISBN 978-3531157719
  • Otto B. Roegele: Plea for journalistic responsibility. Contributions to journalism, media and communication. Konstanz 2000. ISBN 978-3896693013
  • Rupert M. Scheule, Rafael Capurro, Thomas Hausmanninger (eds.): Networked spoken. The digital divide from an ethical perspective. Munich 2004. ISBN 978-3770539680
  • Christian Schicha, Carsten Brosda (Ed.): Media ethics between theory and practice. Standards for the communication society. Münster 2000. ISBN 978-3825847005
  • Martin R. Schütz: Journalistic Virtues. Guidelines of a professional ethic. Opladen 2003. ISBN 978-3531140889
  • Barbara Thomaß: Journalistic Ethics. A comparison of the discourses in France, Great Britain and Germany. Opladen 1998. ISBN 978-3531132259
  • Barbara Thomaß: Ethics of the communication professions - journalism - PR - advertising. Wiesbaden 2010. ISBN 978-3531144160
  • Peter Voss: Maturity in the media system. Does media ethics have a chance? Comments from a responsible person on the theory and practice of the mass media. Baden-Baden 1998. ISBN 978-3789056925
  • Siegfried Weischenberg: Journalism. Volume 1: Media systems, media ethics, media institutions. 3. Edition. Wiesbaden 2004. ISBN 978-3531131115
  • Gotlind Ulshöfer: Media ethics in the face of digitization in the context of Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism [Media ethics in the face of digitization in the context of Christianity, Judaism, Islam and Buddhism]. In: Handbuch der Religionen [LOTR], ed. by Michael Klöcker and Udo Tworuschka, 62nd supplementary delivery (November 2019), Hohenwarsleben 2019, ISSN 2510-6740

Web links

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ cf. Klaus Wiegerling: Media Ethics . Stuttgart, Weimar 1998
  2. ↑ Christian Schicha, "Media Ethics and Media Quality", in: Zeitschrift für Kommunikationökologie 2/2003, pp. 44–53, here: 46
  3. ↑ a b (Multimedia Code of Ethics 2012). www.multimedia-ethik.net, accessed on January 30, 2016 .
  4. ↑ Niklas Luhmann, Ethics as a reflection theory of morality. In: ders .: Society structure and semantics. Studies on the sociology of knowledge in modern society , Vol. 3, Frankfurt am Main 1989, pp. 358–448
  5. ↑ (What is media ethics? An explanation of terms). Thomas Hausmanninger, archived from the original on February 3, 2016 ; accessed on January 30, 2016 .
  6. ↑ Eike Bohlken, media ethics as responsibility ethics. Between being responsible for doing things and having user competence. In: Debatin, Bernhard u. Funiok, Rüdiger (ed.), Kommunikation- und Medienethik , Konstanz 2003, pp. 35–49, here: 36
  7. ↑ cf. Maletzke, Psychology of Mass Communication . Hamburg 1963, p. 32
  8. ^ Joachim R. Höflich, Mensch, Computer und Kommunikation. Theoretical locations and empirical findings , Frankfurt / M. including 2003
  9. ↑ Rüdiger Funiok, Media Ethics: Despite stumbling blocks, the value discourse about media is indispensable. In: Matthias Karmasin (Ed.), Medien und Ethik , Stuttgart 2002, pp. 37–58
  10. ↑ Klaus Wiegerling, media ethics , Stuttgart, Weimar 1998, p 1
  11. ↑ Eike Bohlken, media ethics as responsibility ethics. Between being responsible for doing things and having user competence. In: Debatin, Bernhard u. Funiok, Rüdiger (ed.), Kommunikation- und Medienethik , Konstanz 2003, pp. 35–49, here: 38
  12. ↑ Boventer in the foreword of his work on the "Ethics of Journalism" (1984)
  13. ↑ Lübbe 1994
  14. ↑ (Code of Ethics for the Advertising Industry). (PDF) Austrian Advertising Council, accessed on January 30, 2016 .
  15. ↑ a b Christian Schicha / Carsten Brosda (eds.), Handbuch Medienethik , Wiesbaden 2010, p. 14
  16. ↑ Jürgen Habermas, Explanations on Discourse Ethics , Frankfurt am Main 1991, p. 76
  17. ↑ Achim Baum, Armin Scholl, Truth and Reality. What can journalism research contribute to journalistic ethics? In: Ch. Schicha, C. Brosda (Ilrsg.): Media ethics between theory and practice , Münster 2000, pp. 90-108, here: 93
  18. ^ Bernhard Pörksen, Constructivism. In: Christian Schicha / Carsten Brosda (eds.), Handbuch Medienethik , Wiesbaden 2010, pp. 53–67, here: 65
  19. ↑ Günter Ropohl, The Risk in Principle Responsibility. In: Ethik und Sozialwissenschaften, 5 (1994), pp. 109–120, here: 110
  20. ↑ held 1919; First published as a separate publication: Berlin 1926
  21. ^ Rüdiger Funiok, Media Ethics. In: Jürgen Hüther / Bernd Schorb (eds.), Basic concepts of media education. 4th, completely redesigned edition. Munich 2005, pp. 243-251, here: 247
  22. ^ Rüdiger Funiok, Media Ethics. From politics and contemporary history, B 41-42, 2000, accessed on January 30, 2016 .
  23. ↑ cf. Bernhard Debatin, Media Ethics as a Control Instrument? On the relationship between individual and corporate responsibility in mass communication. In: Hartmut Weßler et al. (Ed.), Perspektiven der Medienkritik. The social debate with public communication in the media society , Opladen 1997, pp. 287–303
  24. ↑ Almost three quarters of all SRG journalists are left. Tagesanzeiger.ch, accessed on January 27, 2018
  25. ↑ Thomas Hausmanninger, the audience actually rejects depictions of violence. Catholic social ethics and the view of popular media. Conversation with Prof. Dr. Thomas Hausmanninger. In: TV Discourse, Responsibility in Audiovisual Media 17, Baden-Baden 2001, p. 17
  26. ↑ a b Cinema reform movement. Dictionary of Film Terms, accessed January 30, 2016 .
  27. ↑ Film Studies. Dictionary of Film Terms, accessed January 30, 2016 .
  28. ↑ Werner Glogauer, criminalization of children and young people through the media. Effects of violent, sexual, pornographic and satanic depictions. Baden-Baden 1991
  29. ↑ Hans Giffhorn, Political Education in the Aesthetic Area , Hanover 1971
  30. ^ Bernhard Laux, Eccentric Social Ethics. On the presence and effectiveness of the Christian faith in modern society (Forum Religion and Social Culture 13, edited by Karl Gabriel) Münster 2007
  31. ^ Walter Lesch, Discourse Ethics as a Basic Theory of Media Communication . In: Rüdiger Funiok (ed.): Basic questions of communication ethics. Konstanz 1996, pp. 97-106
  32. ↑ Edmund Arens, The Importance of Discourse Ethics for Communication and Media Ethics . In: Rüdiger Funiok (ed.): Basic questions of communication ethics . Konstanz 1996, pp. 73-96
  33. ↑ Thomas Hausmanninger, Critique of Media Ethical Reason. The ethical discussion about film in Germany . Munich 1992
  34. ↑ Thomas Bohrmann, Ethics - Advertising - Media Violence. Advertising related to violence on television. A socio-ethical program. Munich 1997
  35. ^ Siegfried J. Schmidt, Cognitive Autonomy and Social Orientation. Constructivist remarks on the relationship between cognition, communication, media and culture. Frankfurt am Main 1994
  36. ↑ Petra Grimm / Heinrich Badura (eds.), Media - Ethics - Violence. Stuttgart 2011
  37. ^ Contributions to a digital ontology. Rafael Capurro, accessed January 30, 2016 .
  38. ^ Thomas Hausmanninger / Ralf Capurro, Netzethik. Fundamental questions of internet ethics. Munich 2002
  39. ↑ Media Ethics in the Age of the Internet. Mike Sandbothe, accessed January 30, 2016 .
  40. ↑ Alexander Filipovic, “The Narrowness of the Wide Media World. Do algorithms threaten the freedom of public communication? ”, In: Communicatio Socialis 46 (2013), No. 2: 192–208
  41. ↑ Alexander Filipović, The datafication of the world. An ethical measurement of digital change. In: Communicatio Socialis, Volume 48, 2015, No. 1, pp. 6-15
  42. ↑ Alexander Godulla, Authenticity as a premise? Morally legitimized action in press photography. In: Communicatio Socialis, Volume 47, 2014, No. 3, pp. 402-410
  43. ↑ Jasmin Azaiz, Watchblogs as Watchdogs? A comparative content analysis on media criticism in watch blogs and media pages of national quality newspapers, webSquare, 06/2011. URL: http://websquare.imb-uni-augsburg.de/files/Bachelorarbeit_Jasmin_Azaiz.pdf
  44. ↑ Alexander Filipović, Lügenpresse, Germanwings, Aylan - A media ethical review of the year 2015. In: Augsburger Allgemeine, December 18, 2015, p. 17. URL: http://www.netzwerk-medienethik.de/2015/12/22/luegenpresse -germanwings-aylan-a-media-ethical-annual-review-2015 / # more-3673
  45. ↑ Lutz Hagen, news journalism in the crisis of confidence. 'Lying press' viewed scientifically: Journalism between a resource crisis and an unleashed audience. In: Communicatio Socialis, Volume 48, 2015, no. 2, pp. 152-163
  46. ↑ so Wolfgang Wunden, “Freedom Media Morality. Concept of a systematic media ethics ”, in: ders., (Ed.): Freedom and media. Contributions to media ethics (Volume 4). Frankfurt a. M. 1998. pp. 145-161