On two occasions, in separate letters to this newspaper, The Times correspondent Alex Vella accused me of breaching journalistic ethics. My crime, according to him, was that I dared criticise his way of reporting water polo matches.

Mr Vella will be disappointed to know that there was no breach of ethics at all. Nowhere is it written down that journalists cannot find fault with any of their colleagues. Our own code of ethics lays down a number of provisos that journalists should follow, but “you cannot criticise any other journalists” or something of the sort is not one of them.

This is a fact.

The only way Mr Vella tried to defend himself was by accusing me of breaching a rule when such rule does not exist. When, for the second time, he made this allegation last Sunday, I went through the code just to confirm what I already knew and I was not surprised that there was nothing that prohibits journalists from picking on others who do the same job.

After all, if we can criticise presidents, prime ministers, archbishops et al, it would be stupid if there was a rule stipulating that we cannot write about fellow journalists, wouldn’t it?

It happens all the time in both local and foreign media that journalists and opinion-makers argue about all imaginable issues, not only sport. Claims of hidden agendas and accusations of biased reporting are part and parcel of the game.

Making public one’s opinion – whether it is a report on a water polo game or the Watergate scandal – opens the way for others to comment. If Mr Vella feels aggrieved when he is criticised, then he is in the wrong job. He should get out of the kitchen if he can’t take the heat.

As a journalist, I know that each time I write something there will be people who will agree with me and others who will not. There are people who write and shower me with praise, and there are others, including fellow columnists, who shoot me down, many times in public.

Following my article on the water polo season last month, to which Mr Vella objected, I received e-mails in support and others with nasty comments about my family and me. I also got an anonymous letter, probably from a cowardly Neptunes’ supporter.

So what? It comes with the job. I accept both the praise and the criticism (when it is personal, I know I’ve hit the nail on the head), and move on.

What I think is not correct is that journalists take up official posts with organisations; posts that could lead them to a direct confrontation with the newspaper or media that employs them.

By his own admission in one of the letters (it was public knowledge anyway), Mr Vella said that he is the “press officer of a local sports association”. He did not say which one it is, and I will not be revealing any secrets when I tell you that it is the Malta Football Association (MFA).

Admittedly, since taking up this MFA post, Mr Vella did not write about football any more. In this regard, he did the right thing. But I still believe that no journalist – and Mr Vella is not the only one – should put himself in a situation that could potentially see him as serving two masters.

Let me give you a clear example, based on something that really happened.

In May 2005, when I was editor of The Malta Independent (daily), I published an article written by Nationalist MP Robert Arrigo about the MFA. A few days later, I received a letter of reply from the association, which was signed by Mr Vella as MFA communications officer. In it, on behalf of the MFA, Mr Vella rebutted what Mr Arrigo had written, and informed me that the then MFA president Joe Mifsud was suing Mr Arrigo and myself for libel (a case that is still to be decided, five-and-a-half years down the line).

Now, if, for argument’s sake, Mr Arrigo’s article had been published in The Times, which employs Mr Vella as a part-time correspondent, what would have happened? Would Mr Vella have written to the editor of the newspaper that employs him part-time informing him about the libel case? If this had happened, would it not have been a case of a conflict of interest? Or would the MFA have replied under someone else’s signature to avoid such a conflict, but at the same time by so doing making Mr Vella’s position as media officer irrelevant?

That such a conflict of interest does exist could be seen in the way the new MFA president, Norman Darmanin Demajo, replied to my question in this regard during last Sunday’s Replay sports programme on Net Television. Mr Darmanin Demajo appeared at a loss for words when I put this argument to him, and only managed to say that mine was a “fair comment”.

I think it is much more than that. The credibility of the whole profession is at stake here.

Journalists should stay away from these appointments because they are incompatible with their professional duties. It’s a question of loyalty. When journalists become representatives of an association, they become servants of two masters – that association and the media they work for. And the question is: whom will they serve?

When, some 10 or 12 years ago, the then president of the Aquatic Sports Association Robbie Ebejer approached me to offer me the post of ASA secretary, I flatly refused on these grounds. At the time, I used to report water polo games, and although I was interested in the post, I could never accept it because it would have meant that I could no longer be completely loyal to the company that employs me and the newspaper’s readers. Mr Ebejer understood my position and let it go.

Organisations should refrain from asking journalists to take up positions within their ranks. If they receive such proposals, journalists should turn them down. And, if such proposals are made and journalists accept them, media houses should make the journalist choose between keeping the job with the newspaper or station, or taking up the post with the organisation.

[email protected]