It may seem self-evident that journalists should seek to report accurately. However, the very large amount of inaccurate reporting – particularly noticeable at election times – suggest that the point bears repeating.

The requirement of accuracy works at many different levels. At its simplest it means that journalists report candidates’ names accurately, that they give accurate numbers for those attending election events, that they report candidates’ words accurately and so on.

Journalists have a broader responsibility to place the words and events that they report in a clear and accurate context. A news report can easily become skewed in favour or against a particular candidate if the context of a statement is not given accurately. So often this will require a journalist or editor to place one candidate’s remark in its correct relationship to the stated position of other candidates.

The media will always compete to get a story quickly. But there is an ethical responsibility not only to be quick but also to be accurate – or at least as accurate as possible in the circumstances. There are pragmatic reasons for this, as well as principled ones. Media or journalists that are cavalier with the facts will not be trusted and will find it more difficult to gather information.