Half empty or half full?
"Affaire Bilan": Jeannet scolded by the Swiss Press Council
"Affaire Bilan": Jeannet scolded by the Swiss Press CouncilBy Christophe BüchiFor months, Bilan editor-in-chief Alain Jeannet has had to defend himself against accusations that he was too compliant with the business community. The Press Council has come to the conclusion that Jeannet violated journalistic ethics by accepting a discounted Jordi watch and with his PR work for the Kudelski company. On the other hand, Jeannet was exonerated on other points.
What is now known in the French-speaking press as the "Bilan affair" has been simmering for months. It began last year when two editors of the newspaper resigned. They justified their resignation with reasons of conscience; they could not accept the course of their new boss Jeannet. They accused him of wanting to turn the business magazine, which under Jeannet's (recently deceased) predecessor Max Mabillard had pursued a fairly independent course, into a compliant business newspaper.
The accusations were vehemently denied by Jeannet, but were taken up by the French-speaking section of the Swiss Journalists' Association. The Syndicat lémanique des journalistes took the incident as an opportunity to demand that the Edipresse group, to which Bilan belongs, introduce an editorial statute as quickly as possible.
The association and the journalists finally took the case to the Swiss Press Council, which took it very seriously. This is because it provides a textbook example of the duties and rights of journalists, which is why it is of more than just regional interest.
The gift to the editor-in-chief was over the top
The Vice President of the Press Council, Daniel Cornu, former editor-in-chief of the Tribune de Genève and now head of the Western Switzerland Journalism Training Center in Lausanne, presented the detailed and nuanced conclusions of the professional tribunal to the media. The second chamber of the Press Council came to the conclusion that Jeannet had clearly missed the mark in two cases.
First of all, by letting Ethnofever guru Michel Jordi "gift" him an expensive watch at factory price. According to the press councils, such a gift exceeded the usual level of gratuity and was likely to restrict the journalistic independence of the editor-in-chief and his editorial team.
Jeannet was also found guilty on another point. In the 1999 annual report of the Kudelski company, he had himself photographed on a whole page as a participant at the Davos World Economic Forum, where Kudelski is responsible for entrance security. Jeannet argued that this PR campaign served to launch the new Bilan. However, the Press Council came to the conclusion that Jeannet had violated the rule that journalists must not allow themselves to be used for individual companies.
Unmentioned advertisement boycott
against balance sheet
There was also criticism on another point. The Press Council complained that an advertising boycott by Rentenanstalt against Bilanz was not publicized by its sister newspaper Bilan. A Bilanz article that had provoked the wrath of pension providers had not been published by Bilan, and without justification. This was not correct. Advertising boycotts should be publicized in the interests of readers.
On other points, however, Jeannet was acquitted. For example, the plaintiffs had been upset about a crate of champagne sent to the editorial office by the PR man of a Geneva bank and friend of Jeannet's - the banker in question now runs a chronicle in Bilan. The Press Council was unable to substantiate the accusation of a relationship and cronyism. Jeannet was also accused of changing articles by his employees without asking - but for the Press Council, an editor-in-chief has the right to do so.
The Press Council only has moral authority
With this ruling, the Press Council made a Solomonic decision. Both sides were able to declare themselves satisfied at the drop of a hat. Jeannet sees the decision as recognition of his journalistic independence, while the journalists' association is pleased that the Press Council at least pulled out the yellow card.
The decision has no direct consequences: The Press Council "only" has moral authority. Nevertheless, with this decision, the Press Council is helping to remind journalists of the importance of maintaining a certain distance from the economy. However, Cornu points out that Jeannet should not be made a scapegoat and sent into the desert: many journalists accepted discounts on flight tickets, for example, without batting an eyelid. Every journalist must therefore ask themselves how they feel about their own independence...
Corrigendum
What is now known in the French-speaking press as the "Bilan affair" has been simmering for months. It began last year when two editors of the newspaper resigned. They justified their resignation with reasons of conscience; they could not accept the course of their new boss Jeannet. They accused him of wanting to turn the business magazine, which under Jeannet's (recently deceased) predecessor Max Mabillard had pursued a fairly independent course, into a compliant business newspaper.
The accusations were vehemently denied by Jeannet, but were taken up by the French-speaking section of the Swiss Journalists' Association. The Syndicat lémanique des journalistes took the incident as an opportunity to demand that the Edipresse group, to which Bilan belongs, introduce an editorial statute as quickly as possible.
The association and the journalists finally took the case to the Swiss Press Council, which took it very seriously. This is because it provides a textbook example of the duties and rights of journalists, which is why it is of more than just regional interest.
The gift to the editor-in-chief was over the top
The Vice President of the Press Council, Daniel Cornu, former editor-in-chief of the Tribune de Genève and now head of the Western Switzerland Journalism Training Center in Lausanne, presented the detailed and nuanced conclusions of the professional tribunal to the media. The second chamber of the Press Council came to the conclusion that Jeannet had clearly missed the mark in two cases.
First of all, by letting Ethnofever guru Michel Jordi "gift" him an expensive watch at factory price. According to the press councils, such a gift exceeded the usual level of gratuity and was likely to restrict the journalistic independence of the editor-in-chief and his editorial team.
Jeannet was also found guilty on another point. In the 1999 annual report of the Kudelski company, he had himself photographed on a whole page as a participant at the Davos World Economic Forum, where Kudelski is responsible for entrance security. Jeannet argued that this PR campaign served to launch the new Bilan. However, the Press Council came to the conclusion that Jeannet had violated the rule that journalists must not allow themselves to be used for individual companies.
Unmentioned advertisement boycott
against balance sheet
There was also criticism on another point. The Press Council complained that an advertising boycott by Rentenanstalt against Bilanz was not publicized by its sister newspaper Bilan. A Bilanz article that had provoked the wrath of pension providers had not been published by Bilan, and without justification. This was not correct. Advertising boycotts should be publicized in the interests of readers.
On other points, however, Jeannet was acquitted. For example, the plaintiffs had been upset about a crate of champagne sent to the editorial office by the PR man of a Geneva bank and friend of Jeannet's - the banker in question now runs a chronicle in Bilan. The Press Council was unable to substantiate the accusation of a relationship and cronyism. Jeannet was also accused of changing articles by his employees without asking - but for the Press Council, an editor-in-chief has the right to do so.
The Press Council only has moral authority
With this ruling, the Press Council made a Solomonic decision. Both sides were able to declare themselves satisfied at the drop of a hat. Jeannet sees the decision as recognition of his journalistic independence, while the journalists' association is pleased that the Press Council at least pulled out the yellow card.
The decision has no direct consequences: The Press Council "only" has moral authority. Nevertheless, with this decision, the Press Council is helping to remind journalists of the importance of maintaining a certain distance from the economy. However, Cornu points out that Jeannet should not be made a scapegoat and sent into the desert: many journalists accepted discounts on flight tickets, for example, without batting an eyelid. Every journalist must therefore ask themselves how they feel about their own independence...
Corrigendum
In Advertising Week No. 8/01, we made a mistake in the illustration of the article "Die SP geht links.ch". We showed the Zurich weekly P.S., referred to it in the caption as "SP-Blatt" and assumed that it would have to make way for the new SPS monthly links.ch.
That was not correct. According to Thierry Frochaux, Publishing Director at P.S. Verlag GmbH, P.S. is neither an organ of the city of Zurich SP nor of the cantonal party and has no financial connection to them. P.S. will therefore continue to be published independently of an SPS monthly newspaper.
Publishing director Frochaux confirms that Koni Löpfe, President of the SP Stadt Zürich, is co-owner of P.S. Verlag and also part of the editorial team. However, he notes that P.S. Verlag is privately run and independent of any political party and generates its turnover exclusively from subscriber contributions and advertisements. In short: "P.S. has about as much to do with the SP as the NZZ has to do with the FDP," says Frochaux.
