The North Carolina Film Critics Association recognizes that its members practice film criticism using a variety of media and that journalism continues to evolve. While attempting to establish standards of practice and principles that should guide members, the NCFCA recognizes that it is impossible to construct a comprehensive list of practices that could result in censure. The role of the Governing Board is not only to sanction unethical or unprofessional behavior but also to counsel and educate its membership on the principles that should guide our practice. Members who have questions or concerns about whether certain practices are appropriate are encouraged to reach out to the Governing Board for open discussion.

The three guiding principles that should inform member practices are Honesty, Fairness, and Transparency. These principles can manifest in several areas, and the following list is not meant to be exhaustive. But it should serve as a guide for what the NCFCA considers “best practices.”

In relation to content creators (including but not limited to creative talent, studio representatives, and publicists):

1. When seeking access to films or talent, critics should be forthright and truthful about how and when they plan to use that access.
2. If a critic accepts restrictions on how or when content can be used as a condition of access, he or she should honor those restrictions to the extent possible. This includes but is not limited to embargoes (restrictions on when content may be used) or interview topics (such as questions considered to be “off the record” or “off-limits” when stipulated in advance.)
3. Reviews, editorials, and interviews should reflect the critic’s genuine perspective, supported by research, thoughtful evaluation, and honest engagement.
4. If a conflict of interest arises during the process of covering or reviewing a film, or conducting an interview, a critic should disclose the nature of the conflict or, if necessary, recuse themselves from coverage. Transparency with audiences and fellow critics helps maintain integrity and trust in the critical process.
5. Critics who attend a screening, accept a screener, or book an interview should do so with a good faith intention to complete and publish their coverage as agreed. While unforeseen circumstances may arise, critics should make every effort to communicate any delays or inability to publish or produce material with the publicist or filmmaker.
6. Critics should not under any circumstances solicit payment from a content creator, content owner, distributor, film representative, or publicist in exchange for a review or in exchange for changing a rating (such as on Rotten Tomatoes). While some outlets solicit fees for “expediting” reviews, NCFCA members are discouraged from doing so.
   • A. If any member accepts fees of this nature, they should make the Governing Board aware they are doing so, and it should be shared with the critic’s audiences.
7. GenAI technologies should not be used to generate reviews, editorials, or interviews that are then presented as a critic’s original work.

In Relation to Readers/Viewers/Consumers of Criticism

1. Critics should seek a way to communicate to readers or viewers if the writer, producer, or owner of a website, podcast, periodical, channel, etc. has received, directly or indirectly, any inducements to publish. This includes but is not limited to “swag” (promotional material or gifts) not offered to the general public or free travel or lodging when attending press conferences, festivals, or junkets. Access to talent for interviews is assumed/understood to be an inducement and does not need to be disclosed separately.
2. Advertising should be clearly labeled as such and distinguished from editorial content or reviews. Paid content, such as when a third party offers to provide thematic material in exchange for linkbacks or promotions is discouraged and should be labeled as such.
3. Critics or venues that collect personal information (such as for email newsletters or identity verification in comments sections) should have a clear policy of when, if at all, such personal information could be shared with third parties and that policy should be provided to readers/viewers at the point of collection.

In Relation to Other Critics or Colleagues

1. Critics are expected to treat their colleagues, including and especially those who express different opinions about the quality of a film, with respect. Hateful or derogatory speech directed towards others in this arena is not acceptable. This includes both printed reviews and social media comments or interactions. Critics can and will disagree in their assessment of films, but such disagreements should never escalate into ad hominem attacks.
2. Members of the NCFCA should remember that they represent the organization as well as their personal channels, blogs, etc. Consequently, they should avoid incendiary or derogatory remarks about the organization, its awards choices, its officers, or its sponsored events. Again, disagreements are healthy and acceptable. Criticisms that attack the character or competency of other members are inappropriate.
3. While outlets to which members contribute may be in competition with one another, members are expected to treat other members as colleagues rather than adversaries. Providing misinformation to another critic or about another critic with the motive of disrupting or sabotaging that critic’s professional reputation or to increase the chances that one might get a particular “scoop” is both unethical and deleterious to the health of an organization.

A critic who accepts admittance to the NCFCA is agreeing to abide by the decisions of the Governing Board about how these guidelines are interpreted and enforced.