English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

In Canadian journalism there is no law, professional requirement or expectation that journalists discuss with their subjects the potential consequences of the publication of personal information. Therefore, journalism subjects can be at risk of significant harms of which they may be unaware. These harms range from deception and loss of autonomy to loss of income, loss of employment and loss of family. The situation in journalism stands in stark contrast to health practice and health and social science research where mandatory informed consent protocols require that any significant risks are disclosed to subjects/patients prior to their reaching a decision about participation. This thesis argues that consent transactions in journalism should similarly require a duty to discuss consequences but avoid the bureaucratic and rigid processes of informed consent protocols. Finally, this thesis argues that a duty to protect subjects from harm is consistent with a duty to promote the public interest.

Consent and consequences : journalists' duty to inform subjects of potential harms