Entendo que o Relatório MacBride é um marco na história. Ele não foi somente um exercício científico básico de descoberta para o estado da comunicação no mundo, mas o primeiro e principal exercício de avaliação das forças sócio-econômicas no mundo naquela época. Entendo o Relatório no contexto do que é conhecido como “o grande debate da mídia” nas últimas três décadas e meia (Nordenstreng 1999; Gerbner & al. 1993). (leia mais no PDF).

A social responsibility (SR) theory of the press has emerged in various democratic societies worldwide since World War II. The Hutchins Commission in the United States is the source of this paradigm in some cases, but a similar emphasis on serving society rather than commerce or government has also arisen in parallel fashion without any connection to Hutchins. Professionalism and codes of professional ethics are too narrow to serve as the framework for a global SR paradigm of the 21st century. (...) Instead, universal ethical principles are the most appropriate framework, and the cross-cultural axis around which these principles revolve is the sacredness of human life. Embedded in the protonorm of human sacredness are such ethical principles as human dignity, truthtelling, and nonmaleficence. These principles are citizen ethics rather than professional ethics; they are set in the social domain where SR gets its rationale. They provide a frame of reference internationally for assessing local news media practices and formulating codes of ethics. (shrink)

Probing the vague boundaries and constraints commonly placed on humor, this exploratory essay considers the responsibilities and duties that can guide political humor. Working within a deontological paradigm, the essay establishes the relevance of ethics within society's political humor and considers the importance of ethical political humor. Moreover, this study points to Christians and Nordenstreng's model of global social responsibility theory as providing a parsimonious and flexible framework for orienting ethical political humor.

This study examines the use of disparaging and offensive trademarks and mascots by sports teams. Specifically, this study considers whether the continued use of Native American symbols and mascots in sports comports with the Christians-Nordenstreng conceptualization of social responsibility, which considers the three principles of human dignity, truth-telling, and nonmaleficence. To do this, the article considers the history and arguments both for and against the use of these symbols in sports communication. This article concludes with a discussion of how (...) the use of these trademarks does not fulfill the three principles of social responsibility and what that means for the symbols’ continued use. (shrink)