Singapore Med J. 2009 Dec;50(12):1120-2.
The concept of editorial freedom or independence is examined in the light of the editor-owner relationship. Like individual and national freedom or independence, it is a rhetorical concept whose realisation flows from internal achievement as much as it depends on external validation. This freedom entails roles and responsibilities embodied in specific codes of practice for editors, such as the guidelines espoused by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Association of Medical Editors. The calling to embody these guidelines makes editing a vocation that demands isolation and distancing, separation and solitude. It involves bracketing one's biases, prejudgments and preconceptions. With such detachment comes real freedom; one that requires a moral fibre and trustworthiness that uphold truth and right, whether in full view of public scrutiny, or in the aloneness of private secrecy. The stereotypical tension between academic and commercial concerns highlights the editor-owner relationship, and bears directly on editorial independence. In practice, journal owners overstep their prerogatives. The absence of clear contracts defining editorial independence and the lack of established mechanisms governing the editor-owner relationship affect many small- to medium-sized journals in developing countries. Even large journals in developed and democratic nations or totalitarian states and societies are not spared. At the end of the day, editorial freedom exists only insofar as it is tolerated, or until editors cross the line.
本文从编辑-所有者关系的角度探讨了编辑自由或独立的概念。与个人和国家的自由或独立一样，它是一个修辞概念，其实现既取决于内部成就，也取决于外部验证。这种自由需要编辑具体实践准则所体现的角色和责任，例如国际医学期刊编辑委员会和世界医学编辑协会所拥护的准则。遵守这些准则的要求使得编辑成为一种需要隔离和疏远、分离和独处的职业。它涉及到屏蔽个人的偏见、先入之见和偏见。这种超脱带来了真正的自由；这种自由需要道德操守和值得信赖，以维护真理和正义，无论是在公众监督的全面关注下，还是在私人秘密的孤独中。学术和商业关注之间的刻板紧张关系突出了编辑-所有者关系，并直接影响编辑的独立性。在实践中，期刊所有者超越了他们的特权。缺乏明确界定编辑独立性的合同以及缺乏管理编辑-所有者关系的既定机制，影响了发展中国家许多中小规模的期刊。即使是发达国家和民主国家或极权主义国家和社会中的大型期刊也不能幸免。归根结底，只要编辑自由得到容忍，或者直到编辑越过界限，它才存在。
