Bribery or the pursuit of truth?

Journalists working in dodgy corners of the world will inevitably come up against corruption: access to a government minister might require a palm to be greased; a visa could be subject to a “facility fee”; a few dollars could hasten that border crossing on a lonely road late at night.

Let’s be clear: the Observer doesn’t bribe people or corrupt public servants. Our editorial code states that we do not pay for stories or pay sources and in the rare instances that we do, payments must be approved by the editor.

But what about that meal bought for a source to secure a vital interview or to get close to a big story? Could that be construed as corrupt?

A sad end to the career of a pioneering journalist

A look back at veteran newswoman Helen Thomas and her fall from grace…

The mailbag: A year-end grab bag

The absence of new or high-profile programs on PBS in recent weeks leaves the NewsHour as the focus of viewers’ attention.

Reporting restraints eased

It was a case of “don’t read, don’t tell” and the ensuing silence in Stars and Stripes was deafening. In response to the Wikileaks disclosures, the U.S. government imposed restrictions on access to information widely available to nearly everyone else in the world.

For Stars and Stripes, the mandate meant that journalists could not access websites that post classified or sensitive information from their government-owned and personal computers.

The newspaper’s ombudsman protested the restrictions. Now comes word that they may be rescinded for the independent news organization.

Headlines take shots from the right and left

Headlines on stories about emotionally charged issues come under fire from readers, but the readers come from different sides of the political aisle.

Truth elusive in Kent State deaths

More than 40 years later, the quest to get to the heart of what really happened at Kent State on May 4, 1970 continues.

Why we were right to publish the WikiLeaks material

The simple journalistic truth that underpins probably the largest and most complex reporting exercise ever undertaken by the Guardian is that all the stories emerging from the WikiLeaks material would have been important public-interest stories in any circumstances.

Among those who emailed and posted comments on the WikiLeaks stories online, most agree that publication was and is the right thing to do. But a substantial minority hold a different view.

Post should give more background information on non-staff stories

A recent story in the Washington Post written by journalists who work for the nonprofit Center for Public Integrity prompts readers to ask, “What is the Center for Public Integrity?” They’d never heard of it, and there was no explanation with the story.

Use my tax break for debt relief

“I just don’t understand why — in the face of this horrid debt — Washington would continue tax cuts that were supposed to expire… I’m not a money guy, but I’d rather forego my tax break and start paying down the debt.”

The price of press freedom

For one veteran Mexican journalist, the price of truth telling has meant exchanging a journalist’s notebook and camera for a janitor’s broom. By reporting information that would put his life at risk, Luis Horacio Najera has been deprived of the opportunity to do work he has long loved.

Najera and his family fled to Canada in September of 2009 in the wake of death threats for his reporting on human rights abuses in the Mexican northern border city of Juárez.

Najera was in Toronto to be honoured for “fearless reporting” by Canadian Journalists for Free Expression.