Debate over journalistic standards intensifies after controversial Ruginienė interview

A public discussion on journalistic ethics and standards has erupted in Lithuania following a widely criticised interview with Prime Minister Inga Ruginienė, conducted by political scientist Rima Urbonaitė on the Laisvės TV channel, reports LRT.

The debate centres on what defines a journalist today, as traditional media faces growing competition from alternative platforms. Ruslanas Iržikevičius, head of Lithuania’s Media Support Foundation, emphasised that any outlet claiming media status must adhere to ethical standards and fact-checking. He noted that in the UK, YouTube—rather than traditional broadcasters—ranks as the second-most-watched platform after the BBC, complicating the definition of media itself. “The question is how they define themselves,” he said.

Saulius Jakučionis, editor-in-chief of the BNS news agency, acknowledged that the rise of social media has expanded the field beyond traditional linear broadcasting. “Today, anyone who can gather, process, and distribute information—whether through a newsroom or other platforms—can call themselves a journalist,” he said. However, he stressed that state regulation in Lithuania still recognises a finite list of official media outlets, and with journalistic status comes responsibility. “Journalists have certain privileges and rights, but also duties—primarily to uphold professional ethics and handle information honestly,” Jakučionis added.

Arūnas Valinskas, a television producer, argued that while platforms like OpTV, Kitaip TV, and Laisvės TV may broadly qualify as media, the critical issue is the nature of the content they broadcast. “A knife can be used to prepare food or to kill—media works the same way,” he said. Valinskas also highlighted the gap between evolving public communication practices and legal regulation, noting that modern smartphones function as “portable TV stations,” creating content faster than laws can adapt.

Linas Kontrimas, head of Vilnius University’s Political Communication Research Centre, called for a return to the fundamental question: “Who is a real journalist?” He argued that the profession should regain its prestige, with fact-checking remaining a core duty. “The key responsibility is to have the right facts and present them accurately. The form of presentation is a separate matter,” Kontrimas said.