In the first of a regular new feature, one of Britain’s leading CSR journalists gets behind the headlines to examine what’s really making the news.
On 11 July investigators from the European Commission raided the offices of Vodafone, Orange and seven other mobile phone operators around Europe. Readers of the next day’s newspapers could barely miss this exciting news. It was the top story in the Financial Times. The Independent screamed: “Brussels price probe deals new blow to beleaguered mobile phone sector”. The Guardian reported: “suspicions that consumers are being overcharged for using mobile phones abroad”.
Exactly a week later two different teams of EU officials were in action. The Employment and Social Affairs Commissioner Anna Diamantopoulou and her opposite number in the Enterprise and Information Society Directorate launched a Green Paper on corporate social responsibility. Meanwhile Pascal Lamy, the Trade Commissioner, joined Ms Diamantopoulou in launching plans to promote core labour standards around the world.
This second piece of exciting news on the social responsibility front was not splashed all over the papers. According to the FT’s news database, there was one reference to these events in the papers of 13th July. The Bangkok Post reported: “New rules affect traders; need to improve production processes.”
Should we be surprised at these news judgements? No. Are those judgements well-informed? No.
The Green Paper is an important step in the development of CSR. Its general theme is that social responsibility is in everyone’s interest, but without rigour and transparency it will be meaningless. So companies need to produce reports with sufficiently uniform information to allow comparisons. Also, users of such reports need the assurance of external input and verification to be able to rely on the information produced.
Similarly, consumers who want to buy products which have been produced responsibly need a simple, authoritative labelling system. And investors who want to back responsible companies need clear criteria for making their judgements.
It has a commendably hard edge, in contrast to the output from the DTI’s CSR department over the past year. And from the news point of view, it has important implications for the business world over the next few years.
That is the point, of course. Raids on Vodafone and the other mobile phone operators are big news today but will probably be forgotten in a few months’ time. The Green Paper might be big news in a year or so, but is already forgotten so far as the newspapers are concerned.
To some extent, this is merely the nature of news. News is what matters today. Something like the Green Paper which might be important in a year or so can wait at least a few months. But this is letting the editors off too lightly. Newspapers are not only about news. Their function is not merely to report what has happened that day. They also have a role in flagging up important issues and events, and putting important items on the agenda.
Business editors should therefore be writing about CSR, and especially about the Green Paper. Not on the news pages, because there are more than enough stories which will not wait. But in the analysis and opinion and feature columns, readers should expect to find material which they ought to be thinking about but are not (unless they are in the CSR vanguard).
A company, or even better an entire industry, being attacked or investigated will always be sexier news than the worthiest, most important official document. But anything which addresses one of the most fundamental issues of the decade – the position of business in society – needs to be given the oxygen of publicity.
Globalisation and business responsibility are too important to be left to the riot reporters and opinion-a-day columnists. This is the biggest business issue of the decade. Business journalists need to engage with it.
COMMENTS