Newly elected President of the TRNC Federation of Journalists Associations of Spain (FAPE), Miguel Angel Noceda, warns that social networks and journalism are not the same thing. He cautions against digital media that are created as support only and are often used to spread false information.
These are among the reflections shared by the recently announced FAPE leader during a visit to the United States. The interview with Efe outlines the challenges ahead and key worries for the profession, including job insecurity in journalism.
Is the journalism profession low and disreputable?
It is not inherently disreputable. There are, however, forces that attempt to discredit information when it is provocative. Journalists do not retreat; they report, observe, analyze, and verify. They go out, examine, and count what they see.
From another perspective, job insecurity is real. The profession has faced reductions in staff and salaries, pushing many journalists to seek opportunities outside traditional journalism. This is a central concern for the field today. FAPE was founded a century ago to elevate the standing of the profession. It evolved from a trade practiced alongside other jobs to a recognized vocation with its own standards and purpose.
Today, the parallels are striking: staffing cuts, salary reductions, and journalists exploring roles beyond journalism.
“The fundamental rules of journalism, ethics, deontology and opposition are not met”
The shift in the business model coincided with the economic downturn and the move from print to digital, causing revenue to dip. This is amplified by the rise of social networks and digital media, where advertisements and misuses can distort information for large audiences.
If core standards—ethical behavior, deontology, and independent critique—are not upheld, knowledge accuracy and the profession itself are placed in a fragile moment regarding reliability and security.
How should a reader judge a medium that presents itself as information but may not be?
This is a tough question. Everyone deserves an information environment they can trust, and readers must discern whether a medium is credible. Social networks are not journalism, and what is read there does not become sacred truth. They are sometimes used to spread hoaxes and misleading stories.
The expansion of digital media offers benefits by creating jobs, but the risk lies in how they are used. When used responsibly, they can support good journalism; when exploited, they become props for low-quality or sensational information.
Journalists must engage readers, encouraging interest in credible reporting and fair compensation for quality information. It is not acceptable to expect information for free. This quality standard is why many outlets refrain from spreading unreliable or sensational content and instead highlight serious reporting.
“If they provide false information, those affected can take legal action”
Should access to information be restricted for media that fail to provide accurate reporting?
Access should not be blocked for journalists from accredited outlets, nor should professional secrecy be compromised. When false information is published, those affected may pursue legal remedies.
How should professional secrecy be regulated?
Confidentiality of sources remains essential and non-negotiable. Limiting it undermines journalistic freedom. Recent attempts to force disclosure of sources are not welcome, and the integrity of reporting must be preserved.
What obstacles are you talking about?
There is strong resistance to the idea of protecting journalistic independence. Legal requirements that compel disclosure, or pressures from parties and corporations to halt investigations, pose ongoing challenges. Journalists must do their work conscientiously, meeting standards for verified and accurate information, while defending the right to probe freely.
Increasingly, demands to silence journalism arise, and the industry must stand firm to earn respect.
If there is too much veto power, one-way press conferences, or propaganda without scrutiny, silence becomes the default. When governments, political groups, and corporate interests leverage financial leverage across the media landscape, the risk to independent reporting grows.
Should journalism be planted or nurtured elsewhere?
When such dynamics occur, strong practice and clear positions are necessary. The path forward is to reinforce editorial integrity and public accountability in the media ecosystem.
And why is it so difficult for the industry to stand firm?
Journalists often weigh what a boss might say before taking a stand in risky situations. Yet in moments of gravity, shared positions matter—journalists must act with courage and hold to fundamental principles, even when pressure mounts.