SECTOR 4 “There are journalists who are open about it, [the fact that] they go where there is money.” Even though it is understood that refunding a journalist’s transport has predominantly become a necessity, it remains questionable whether journalists who have received ‘as little as’ a transport refund remain objective. The Post used to have a policy requiring every journalist to refuse a transport refund or any other financial contribution. If they entered into a morally questionable situation, they got fired. The newspaper would, therefore, look into the conduct of their own. They once took up a matter where a Member of Parliament (MP) allegedly bribed a journalist from The Post. The issue was later taken up by the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) who took the MP to court. Other public media houses have set up integrity committees and are working on gift and benefits policies to curtail corruption. There are also cases of corporate corruption, with journalists being flown to certain destinations where they stay in five-star hotels and on their return, they “only show the positive” side. Scores: Individual scores: 1 Country does not meet indicator 2 Country meets only a few aspects of indicator 3 Country meets some aspects of indicator 4 Country meets most aspects of indicator 5 Country meets all aspects of the indicator Average score: 2.9 (2013:2.3; 2011:2.0; 2009:2.5; 2007:n/a; 2005:n/a) 4.6 Journalists and editors do not practise self-censorship in in the private broadcasting and print media. In Zambia, journalists and editors often practise self-censorship in the private broadcasting and print media. One reason is the lack of job security, especially in the private sector. Journalists are very careful to ensure they do what is regarded as ‘politically correct’ because the media house may not be willing to suffer any financial losses or other consequences for the behaviour of a single journalist. 62 AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER ZAMBIA 2017