he press (or the media as it is now called)
 is considered to be the fourth estate of
 power after the executive, the legislative
 and the judiciary. Each of the latter three
has well-defined responsibilities, owing legitimacy
in a democracy directly or indirectly to the choice of
the people.
Today, in terms of semantics, the words press and
media have become imprecise descriptions of their
function. 'Press', a word more widely used in Latin
countries, initially referred to print publications, but
has come progressively over time to include radio
and television as well. However, the word has had its
limitations; nobody, for example, has ever thought of
including cinema in it not even documentary films.
The word 'media', in comparison, has been used more
in Anglo-Saxon countries, especially those that early
on popularised the expression 'mass media'. All the
same, governments and other state institutions continue
to issue 'press cards', seemingly setting to one side all
the professionals from other media outlets. Therefore,
there is a semantic discrimination, or divide, between
journalistic media and all other media. The difference
between so-called journalistic media and the rest of
the profession (including everything from blogs to
company newsletters and government publications) is
that the latter are not bound by what one can perhaps
describe pompously as press ethics. Ethics of a kind,
perhaps best described as being close to those of sci-
entists who in their own professions agree to weigh the
facts and opinions both in favour and against their case
when seeking out the truth.

But honesty for honesty's sake is not enough; we also
need to reduce the risks of error to a minimum. That
is where the need for quality comes in. Additionally,


we also need to respect the moral rules that determine
the limits of information that is made available to the
public at large, allowing them to make up their own
minds about issues that affect them.

What makes the difference is that thejournalistic press
(or media if you prefer) should simply inform, while
respecting the rules and ethics it has adopted for itself.
It is this balanced information that allows people to
educate themselves and acquire the ability to make
their own choices. That is the big difference.

Sadly, in the real world, the press can be forced by
political or other powers to adopt a less than independ-
ent position. Indeed, it sometimes has little choice but
to accept to do as it is told. Much of this was debated
and discussed in depth at the Media and Development
Forum organised recently in Ouagadougou, Burkina
Faso, by the respective Commissions of the European
Union and the African Union. Also under the spotlight
was how the journalistic media participate in develop-
ment and perhaps can eventually constitute a fourth
estate without real power but with ethics as its sole
'raison d'tre'.

But this can only be achieved under the condition that
the real powers the politicians, bankers and busi-
nessmen leave the press to accomplish their task as
an independent voice. However, as this issue of The
Courier explains, this is no easy task for either side
to achieve. We also examine the state and progress of
the press in the ACP countries and how ways are being
found to move forward for future progress.

 Hegel Goutier
 Editor-in-( I-. F


editorial