Questions.

1. Does the public see a difference between journalists and political commentators/on-air radio hosts like laws and Alan Jones? Should programs and publications, which deal seriously with news and current affairs issues be required to adhere to journalistic standards and practice?

As to the difference between journalist and political commentators in the publics eye I think we like to believe we can distinguish between what we see and hear in the news verses what is suggested by commentators such as Jones and laws. Realistically however it seems as though we we take to heart what they say just as much as what we see and hear through such mediums as print and broadcast journalism. If this we not the case the events such as cash for comment would not have been so obscene. If all they were was entertainers the ethically line would not have been seen to be crossed in the same way it was. Catherine Lumby asks while discussing media ethics in Media and Communications in Australia -

"Is it even relevant to draw those lines when attracting and entertaining audiences are the guiding principals behind almost all media production?" (Lumby in Cunningham & Turner, 2006: 311)

I think it is still relevant, especially in situations where the line of journalist may be blurred in the eyes of the audience as it was in the cash for comment debate, it is in the best interest of the public that this distinction be made and thus they are aware of any bias or agenda behind the news they consume.

Reference:
Lumby, C, 2006. "Media Ethics" in Cunningham & Turner Media and Communiactions in Australia. Allen & Unwin: Australia.