Media Law and Deontology: AI Impact on Journalism

Extract

[...] In line with the recommendations of the Council of Europe regarding a proportionate self-regulation of the profession of journalism, Radio France's control mechanisms also join the work of the CDMSI; thus the report of December 4 to where the deliverable of the Committee of Experts on online security and the responsibility of content creators and users, where particular emphasis is placed on the self-regulatory capacities of journalists in this regard on social networks"5. The ethical charge, annexed to the Collective Agreement for Radio France journalists, therefore proves to be less codified, imperative, than that of BFM6. Therefore, it appears that indeed, the ethical structuring of Radio France is more capable of meeting the criteria of judicial evolution defined by the ECHR, particularly when the latter guarantees self-regulation in the case of scandalous press (ECHR 24 June 2004 Van Hannover v. Germany). II. [...]

[...] Under the control of the judge1 (European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) December 2007, Stoll v. Switzerland) and administrative authorities2, journalists are nonetheless facing growing public distrust with a degradation of their ability to verify sources themselves3. In the context of a predominance of social networks and the major advancement of generative artificial intelligence in the field of information, journalism is undergoing a professional transformation and facing legal challenges on the redefinition of the foundations of their profession4. In the case of study, to what extent are the ethical charters of BFM and France Info able to exemplify this fundamental legal tension? [...]

[...] However, in general, Europe is lagging behind the United States in self-regulation of artificial intelligence within the journalist profession10, tries to bridge the gap with an update on how to perceive the challenges of the Munich Declaration of the duties and rights of journalists of 1971 by the contribution of a report on AI and journalism, published in February 202511. Similarly, at the European level, the Committee of Experts on the Implications of Generative Artificial Intelligence for Freedom of Expression is tasked with providing a draft note on the implications of generative artificial intelligence for freedom of expression by the end of 202512. [...]

[...] Comparative Study of the Ethical Charters of BFM and France Info I. Comparative Study of the Ethical Charters of BFM and France Info While BFM's ethical charter formulates clearly defined prohibitions in the text (for example, a prohibition on publishing statements or images likely to engage the liability of the channel, including personally as a citizen: article 24) or a prohibition on taking a position that could cast doubt on impartiality (article 23) on social networks that could clash with the idea of liberal editorial independence (Cour de cassation, January M. [...]

[...] The fact is that while it is indeed true that proposals for self-regulation are part of a jurisprudential approach brought by the ECHR at the European level, the recent evolutions of the European legislator's textual production leave little doubt about the regulations top-down (or hierarchical) that must be designed for the years to come13. The discussions on the importance of leaving room for an innovative version of regulation in a context of appropriation of tools that should not be perceived as competitive, but complementary, to the journalist's profession also engage a fundamental legal reflection: is it really possible to consider a 'top-down' regulation of this structural upheaval of the practice, and of the deontology, within journalism? [...]