Did people here know about Reuters Trust Principles?

[TigressDem]

I find it quite refreshing to see they put these together in 1941 and kept them in 1984 when they became a public company.


ALL NEWS ORGANIZATIONS SHOULD BE REQUIRED TO ADHERE TO CERTAIN STANDARDS to prevent groups like FAUX becoming a propaganda machine.



https://www.thomsonreuters.com/en/about-us/trust-principles.html

Thomson Reuters itself is obliged and committed to apply the Trust Principles to its operations. The charter documents of Thomson Reuters Corporation include provisions to safeguard the Trust Principles as they apply to the Thomson Reuters business and require Thomson Reuters Directors, in the performance of their duties, to have due regard to the Trust Principles, by the proper exercise of their powers and in accordance with their other duties as Directors.
The Trust Principles are:

1) That Reuters shall at no time pass into the hands of any one interest, group, or faction;
2) That the integrity, independence, and freedom from bias of Thomson Reuters shall at all times be fully preserved;
3) That Reuters shall supply unbiased and reliable news services to newspapers, news agencies, broadcasters, and other media subscribers and to businesses, governments, institutions, individuals, and others with whom Reuters has or may have contracts;
4) That Thomson Reuters shall pay due regard to the many interests which it serves in addition to those of the media; and
5) That no effort shall be spared to expand, develop, and adapt the news and other services and products of Thomson Reuters so as to maintain its leading position in the international news and information business

Thomson Reuters Founders Share Company was established in 1984 when Reuters became a public company. The directors of Thomson Reuters Founders Share Company (known as ‘Trustees’) have a duty to ensure, to the extent possible, that the Trust Principles are complied with.

[bucolic_frolic]

1. Yes, that's all to the good

but enforcement lies with whom, and a public company ultimately answers to its owners, the shareholders. If they did stray toward becoming a second Fox it would take a groundswell from the public and owners to hold them to their principles. There are news organizations that serve privilege and capital - private interests - more so than the common good, and you couldn't dislodge them by any means.

[TigressDem]

2. I think News organizations should be required by FCC

1) To base "NEWS" segments on unbiased facts
2) To label NON Factual "reporting" as "opinion"
3) To NEVER allow special interests to exert influence over NEWS segments

IF they can not abide by those policies, they must call themselves INFOtainment.
They can play on, but they can not call themselves a NEWS agency if they don't stick to the facts.

Just the "actual news" needs to behave like the 4th Estate again and stop all this nonsense of letting lies spread and putting their need for profit over the survival of Democracy in our country.

[bucolic_frolic]

3. Hey, agreed.

But news departments were once committed to all of that, and were funded by their entertainment divisions within the umbrella corporation. Then someone figured the news divisions should make money too. So they sold ads and their advertisers became their puppetmasters. Infotainment is about money now.