U4 Helpdesk Query: Corruption in Culture and Media

Query

Corruption in Culture and Media
Could you provide information regarding corruption as it relates to the media and culture sectors?

Purpose
We are developing a new policy regarding Culture and Media.

Part I: Corruption in Culture and Media Sectors

Corruption in the culture sector is area that is still rather under-researched. First, there is no substantive empirical data available to estimate the actual occurrence of bribery and corruption within the sector. This is not to conclude that corruption and bribery do not happen within the sector but at present hard data is scarce. Some of the reasons behind it are that most of the surveys, be they national or international, do not include the culture sector in their polling as the focus often remains on key public sectors such as judiciary, parliaments, etc. Second, qualitative research and risk assessment is also largely absent. This latter aspect is one that we have attempted to focus on - by providing some preliminary analysis of issues and risks in the sector.

Allocation of grants and research funds: The culture sector provides rather vast opportunities for funding and grants to undertake various cultural projects and research. A large part of such funding often comes from government sources or foreign aid and financial assistance distributed through quasi-public bodies and authorities. Bribery of officials can therefore be used by applicants to gain an unfair advantage and secure such grants and funding.

Professional awards and competitions: Culture is one sector where ongoing artistic competitions and awards are commonplace. These may range from awards of historico-documentary exhibits to competitions in various forms of performance arts. As in most forms of competition involving a reward scheme, prizes and awards may be influenced by bribery, patronage and conflicts of interest. The sports sector is a good example to draw parallels from -- where bribery and corruption allegations, including ones at the top international and Olympic levels, have not been uncommon.

Cultural exchange programmes and study tours: The cultural sector also provides rather extensive opportunities for fully or partially funded exchange programmes and study tours abroad for purposes of cultural exchanges. These may range from exchanges being organised at school level to those at the level of senior public officials. The public bodies (such as Cultural Boards, relevant Ministries or local authorities) in charge of the exchanges usually have to exercise a degree of discretion when selecting the participants of the relevant exchanges and tours abroad. This can be used as a vehicle for bribery and undue favours.

Foreign tours of performance arts and exhibitions: Various performance artists or groups, such as folk dance groups and others, are often given opportunities to perform abroad through various cross-cultural initiatives. This will often be coordinated through bilateral agreements between public and cultural authorities of two countries or city municipalities. Here too, there is scope for unfair selection of groups or members who will take part. In extreme cases, this may even lead to individuals who are not qualified at all (and are not artists or performers) being nominated by the corrupt public official. Although rarely, but there have been some cases where those corruptly selected individuals would use it as an opportunity to get a fully paid trip and visa clearances to a country of their choice for their private purposes or with the intention to extend their stay there illegitimately. At times the managers of the real dance troops, choirs, etc., would not even be aware that the corrupt official had included that particular individual in the list of the artists. At other times, they may be colluding with the public official in question.

Procurement of goods and services: As any other sector, the culture sector has certain public procurement needs, be it choosing contractors to restore artistic and cultural pieces or procuring various supplies necessary for the day-to-day operation of the cultural establishments. Here, risks of corruption commonly associated with procurement of goods and services are present. For more information, see U4 Helpdesk Answer "Common points at which corruption occurs in development programmes".

Construction and refurbishment of establishments: Again, as in many other sectors, the cultural sector would often have to deal with construction contractors to conduct construction, refurbishments and maintenance of museums, monuments, etc. There are numerous corruption risks associated with construction. For more information, see U4 Helpdesk Answer "Resources on corruption in the construction sector".

Misappropriation of budgeted funds: The culture sector is administered through the relevant public bodies, such as Ministries of Culture, Boards and other relevant national and local authorities. In a country with high level of corruption in the public sector in general, such ministries and public authorities are likely to have similar corruption opportunities as other sectoral ministries. This could mean misappropriation and looting by top officials of budgeted funds allocated to the sector. It can involve corruption when distributing the central resources to the lower level local bodies (those colluding with the central body's relevant decision-maker may get larger budget allocation in exchange for kick-backs and other forms of bribery). Finally, other common corruption related risks, such as fraud and financial malpractices in the day-to-day administration of the public resources may be present.

Unlawful licensing and permissions: Another area of grand corruption is where public authorities with decision-making power over granting of licences and various permits may issue authorisations to private sector companies and individuals to, for example, undertake commercial or residential property development or infrastructure works in areas which should have been preserved for their cultural value and heritage.

Incidences involving grand corruption are more likely to get press coverage and are therefore relatively easier to document than the ones listed above under the petty corruption and bribery section. For illustrative purposes, here are two recent examples of grand corruption in the culture sector:

Korea: The head monk of Hwaomsa Temple, one of the nation's largest temples, is currently wanted by the police for allegedly embezzling 600 million won ($600,000) granted by the central and local governments for repairs to the temple's cultural assets…Such embezzlement and other illegal practices associated are unfortunately not new. In 1999 there was a 20 billion won ($20 million) embezzlement case involving Seoul's Chogye Temple.
Source: Korea Times, April 2005

China: At the local level, administrators often turn a blind eye if money can be made through selling cultural objects. On the other hand, simple neglect of ancient sites and the destruction of sites due to large real estate projects, agricultural development, and infrastructure projects pose a threat. The Three Gorges Dam project, for example, is likely to inundate a large number of antiquities. Brave attempts to save material from individual sites concern only a small part of the total area. Meanwhile smugglers have found it easy to negotiate with local officials, and large amounts of material from the upper Yangtze have found their way overseas.
Source: Report by Soudijn and Tijhuis, Netherlands Institute for the Study of Crime and Law Enforcment, Leiden

ii) Media

Media can be an essential pillar in the fight against corruption when it operates on the principles of independence, impartiality and professionalism. Its effectiveness in countering corruption may, however, be undermined by a number of factors.

Corruption within media: The role of the media can be distorted by corruption within the industry itself. By averting the public's gaze from where it is most needed, the damage incurred by such practice to the media's integrity and independence can be far-reaching. Concentration of media ownership poses additional risks to the media's ability to report on corruption. Where the media is concentrated in the hands of a few, conflicts between the owners' interests and the principles of independent reporting invariably arise.

Unethical journalist conduct: Media workers themselves sometimes engage in corrupt activity. This is often - though not exclusively - the result of the difficult financial circumstances in which many media organisations find themselves. In many developing countries, print and broadcast media often run at a loss, resulting in extremely low journalist salaries. This can - and often does - make reporters vulnerable to attempts to undermine their professional integrity, particularly when these attempts are made by unscrupulous media owners.

In the developed world too, media independence is put at risk by the well-established practice of giving and accepting gifts from a variety of public and private sources. While such practices may not in themselves be corrupt, in the absence of clear policies on gift-taking, the receipt of favours can have a direct impact on the ability of the media to report objectively on corrupt activity.

Poor journalistic standards: Inadequate newsroom budgets can result in a less ominous, though equally significant, obstacle to fulfilment of the media's anti-corruption function: that of poor journalistic standards. A lack of financial and human resources has a twofold effect on the ability of the media to produce high-quality material. Firstly, it minimises (or, in some cases, entirely excludes) the possibility of conducting the extended research and investigation required for professional coverage. Secondly, it means that journalists frequently do not receive adequate on-the-job training, particularly in the specialised skills required for successful investigative journalism. At an even more basic level, however, poor journalistic and editorial practice resulting in factual errors or politically slanted coverage can have a profound impact on perceptions of the media's integrity.

Political resistance: Political resistance to media independence can take a variety of forms and is invariably related to attempts to block public scrutiny of the misdeeds of those in power. It can range from simple disregard for transparency obligations or discrimination by authorities against particular journalists and news outlets, to outright abuse by a government of its legal and regulatory powers in an attempt to intimidate or censor the media. In countries where the affairs of government are shrouded in secrecy, journalists often face considerable physical risk when they embark on investigations that could lead to the exposure of corruption. Other than discouraging the use of tools associated with investigative journalism, repeated incidents of violence against journalists can result in strong self-censorship, with reporters and editors refraining from criticising government for fear of retribution.

Repressive legal framework: A related obstacle is that of the existence of laws and regulations that hinder the media's ability to effectively perform its watchdog function. Although Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights states that "everyone should have the [...] freedom to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers [...], through any media [...] of his choice", the reality is that many national legal frameworks continue to place restrictions on the fundamental rights to know and to publish. The most common grounds for such restrictions relate to the privacy rights of individual citizens or private companies and to matters of national security. In the wake of the events of September 11th 2001, new regulations in a number of countries have sought to further limit access to information in the apparent interest of enhancing the authorities' ability to counter terrorism. Though some limited restrictions on such grounds may be justified, the media is all too often faced with draconian libel and official secrets laws that serve only to shield public actors from unwanted attention.

Concentration of media ownership: A lack of diversity of media ownership threatens to stifle the freedom of expression essential to informed public debate. The classic situation in which media owners interfere with their journalists' activities is when the government itself owns all or most of a country's television, radio and press. Indeed, evidence collected from 97 countries suggests that state-owned media tend, in general, to be less effective than private media in monitoring government activities (Source: World Bank Group, World Development Report 2002).

While many countries are now moving away from excessive state-ownership of the media, privatisation has often brought its own dangers. In Latin America and the Caribbean, where levels of state-ownership are relatively low, the media is often restrained by a combination of highly concentrated private ownership and restrictive regulations. In Brazil, concentration is reinforced by a regulatory regime whereby politicians regularly obtain access to broadcast licences. (Source: Transparency International, Global Corruption Report 2003).

In other parts of the world, there is concern that large media conglomerates are undermining coverage of corruption stories deemed damaging to their corporate interests. These concerns revolve around both the might and apparent weakness of such corporations which, though capable of quashing news reports across a variety of national, even international media, may do so because their pursuit of profit leaves them vulnerable to external pressure in a highly competitive global market.

A range of both external and internal obstacles therefore confronts the media in its anti-corruption role. As such, a multi-faceted approach is necessary to adequately address the many challenges described.

Part II: How Can Culture and the Media be used for Anti-Corruption Purposes?

The following reply approaches each topic individually, though to some extent anti-corruption efforts in both areas can be said to mutually reinforce each other. The reply limits its discussion of culture to the creative arts (i.e. performance, audio and visual art) and does not address the role of values/belief systems in countering corruption in particular societies. The discussion of the media is limited to the role of the news media, including public and private institutions that report news, including print (newspapers, magazines), broadcast (radio stations, television stations, television networks), and internet-based media.

i) The role of the creative arts in countering corruption

Creative art requires active perception both by the artist and by the audience. As such it is a powerful media that can communicate messages on many different levels - potentially to a large number of individuals. The creative arts can play an important role in raising public awareness of the dangers of corruption, as well as possible methods to counteract corrupt practices. It can reach members of the public who might otherwise be disinclined to engage with such issues, stimulating debate and even inspiring action against corruption.

In recognition of the potential role the creative arts can play in the fight against corruption, many organisations have actively supported activities that use film, photography, theatre and other art forms to communicate anti-corruption messages. The following is a selection of such activities:

ii) The role of the news media in countering corruption

The media can play both a direct and indirect role in countering corruption. Whereas the former usually relates to the breaking of a particular news story, or set of stories, bringing corruption to public attention, the latter is linked to the broader social impact of the existence of an independent media, where such exists.

One of the most dramatic ways in which the media contributes to the fight against corruption is when news reports exposing misdeeds lead to the forced resignation of public office holders. In Latin America alone, the media has in recent years played a central role in exposing corruption resulting in the ousting of four national leaders: President Bucaram of Ecuador, President Perez of Venezuela, President Collor of Brazil, and President Fujimori of Peru (Sources: Stapenhurst, The Media's Role in Curbing Corruption, 2000 & Freedom House, Press Release, April 30, 2001). In the Philippines, meanwhile, the investigations of journalists into the unexplained wealth of President Joseph Estrada played a crucial role in his eventual downfall (Source: Møller and Jackson, Journalistic Legwork that Tumbled a President, 2002).

Frequently, news reports can prompt official investigations or proceedings into allegations of public or private sector corruption, thus providing an important impulse to official bodies charged with investigating or prosecuting corrupt acts. Due to their importance to the public interest, such investigations themselves often become the focus of subsequent news reports. By reporting on such matters, the media can serve to reinforce the effectiveness of formal proceedings by championing the commitment of those working in the public interest. Alternatively, when official proceedings are conducted in an inept or obstructive manner, the media can push for future reform by highlighting legal and institutional inadequacies.

In addition to its direct role in countering corruption, the very existence of an independent media can have an indirect impact on the instance of corruption in a particular society. A tradition of hard-hitting investigative journalism may, for instance, place an indirect check on corruption that might otherwise take place in the absence of informed public debate. In the United States, it is often argued that coverage of the Watergate scandal solidified the role of investigative reporting in uncovering political misdeeds (Source: American Journalism Review, Watergate Revisited, Aug.-Sept. 2004). Similarly, when the media fosters debate in a way that encourages members of the public to become politically active, it serves as an indirect counterweight to the lack of mass participation in politics often associated with high levels of corruption.

One of the media's most significant indirect contributions to the fight against corruption is to be found in its symbiotic relationship with civil society. Civil society is the realm in which citizens associate according to their own interests, striving neither for political nor economic power. The legitimacy of civil society lies in its pursuit of the common good and, as such, it is uniquely placed to address corruption and maladministration. Its effectiveness in doing so, however, depends not only upon the existence of reliable information upon which to base its actions, but also on the availability of means to disseminate its views. Through the provision of accurate, up-to-date information and a platform for the free expression of opinion, an independent media can significantly contribute to effective civil society action in the anti-corruption field.

Likewise, the existence of an active civil society is integral to the maintenance of those conditions in which an independent media can thrive. Without the constant vigilance and activism of civil society groups working towards social, political and economic justice, special interests may seek to encroach upon the media's ability to report openly and freely. Operating hand-in-hand, the media and civil society can therefore mutually reinforce their respective roles in countering corruption.

For a more detailed analysis of the role of the news media in countering corruption, as well as links to relevant literature and good practice, please see the TI Anti-Corruption Handbook page on this topic.


	Home \| Top
U4 Anti-Corruption Resource Centre	http://www.u4.no