Publication Ethics

Publication information

Publication Frequency: The journal is published three times in a year: January, May and September.

Cost of publication : Publication has no cost to the authors.

Open Access : The journal does not provide open access to all published papers.

Paper submission and decisions : The paper submission process is handled electronically. Manuscripts are to be submitted via the web submission system at or through e-mail ( / Only full papers are reviewed; abstracts are not considered for review. The recommended format is indicated on the main page of the journal. Papers can be submitted in English only.

Authors’ responsibilities

Reporting standards: Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Data, facts and figures should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Originality and Plagiarism: The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, which are not partially or totally published elsewhere, or submitted for publication elsewhere. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Authors are responsible for obtaining written permission in the case of using other images and artwork or for adaptations of such images, if they do not have copyright for them.

Plagiarism will be followed by the rejection of the manuscript. Authors have full responsibility for the authenticity of their paper. In case of multiple authors, the authenticity of the article needs to be ensured by all of them.
Any unethical behavior, manufacture of research results or promotion of deceitful or incorrect arguments may cause the rejection of a submission or the withdrawal of a published article.

Copyright: Published articles are under the copyright of the journal. Partially or totally publication of an article elsewhere is possible only after the consent from the editors.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or conference. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal or conference constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. The corresponding author must maintain the communication with all the co-authors.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Author Self-Archiving: The authors are not permitted to post published articles on their personal or institutional website. However, they should post the published article information with a clear indication of that the paper was published in the journal of Media Watch with a link to the journal’s website.

Fundamental errors in published works: When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his or her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

Reviewers’ responsibilities

All submitted papers are subject to strict double-blind peer-review process by at least two reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper. The factors that are taken into account in review are as follows:

  • Relevance: Is this paper relevant for the topics of this journal?
  • Soundness: Is this paper technically sound and complete?
  • Support: Are the claims supported by experimental/theoretical results?
  • Significance: Is the paper interesting for other media and communication researchers?
  • Originality: Are the results/ideas novel and previously unknown?
  • Readability: Is the paper well-organized and easy to understand?
  • Language: Is the paper written in correct English and style?

Of these, the main factors taken into account are significance and originality.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists Editor-in-Chief/Editor and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

Media Watch reviewers perform work for the journal on a volunteer basis. Peer review assists Editor-in-Chief/Editor and the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.

The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions but without re-review, revise and resubmit, or rejection. Articles that are often rejected include those that are poorly written or organized or are written in poor English. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted. Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed. Articles may be rejected without review if the Editor-in-Chief/Editor considers the article obviously not suitable for publication.

Promptness: If a reviewer feels that the received manuscript does not suite his/hers specialty field and the reviewing process will suffer, he needs to notify the editor.

All reviews should be delivered to the editorial staff in due time. On a regular basis, the review of an article should not take more than one month from the submission of the manuscript to the reviewer to the transmission of the completed review form to the Media Watch editorial board.

Confidentiality: Received manuscripts are confidential documents and reviewers are not allowed to reveal information or discuss about the articles, beside the editor and other persons authorized by the editor. Any suspected conflicts of interests needs to be reported.

The reviewing process needs to be objective, reviewers should argue their statements and personal criticism is not permitted.

The reviewers must use the review form delivered by the editors together with the submitted article. By consenting to do a review the reviewers accept that their names will be published in the list of former reviewers of the journal.
The editorial staff can resubmit a manuscript to additional reviewers in case that considers the answer from previous reviewers insufficient, inappropriate or not timely.

Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should attempt to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that a result or argument has been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Editors’ responsibilities

All submissions must receive an answer from the Editor-in-Chief/Editor, either if the manuscript is rejected, considered for publication or accepted for publication. On a regular basis an article should be processed in less than 6 months from the date of submission by the author to the date of the communication of the editors’ final decision.
The Editor-in-Chief/Editor of the Media Watch journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. Both of them may be guided by the editorial policies of the journal and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editor-in-chief may confer with the members of the Editorial Board or reviewers in making this decision.

Editor-in-Chief/Editor is responsible for the overall quality of the publication. Editor always consider the needs of the authors and the readers when attempting to improve the publication. Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

Editor shall accept or reject a manuscript based only on its scientific content and they will not consider the nationality, gender, race, age or institutional affiliation of the authors.

Only manuscripts that are considered for publication will be sent to blind peer review. Editor-in-Chief/Editor will choose appropriate reviewers considering the manuscript’s content. During the peer review process, editor or any editorial staff will not reveal to reviewers the identity of the authors.

Editors will expose information about a submitted manuscript only to the corresponding author, reviewers and other editorial advisers, except in the case of a manuscript that is suspected for double submission.

Editor may ignore any material that breaks legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.

The editors have to defend the integrity standards of the journal. They will notice and decide about any misconduct on behalf of authors or reviewers. If editor suspect the authenticity of an article, its publication is delayed until any doubt is clarified.

Confidentiality : The Editor-in-Chief, Editor, the members of the Editorial Board, and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the authors of the manuscript, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest : Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript will not be used in the own research of the Editor-in-Chief/Editor or the members of the Editorial Board without the express written consent of the author.

Disclosure of interest of Publisher

The publisher of Media Watch journal is the only person having the rights to sell the journal to the individual, agencies and institutions or authorize an agency for marketing of the journal. Authors are not permitted to be involved in the financial activities/selling of their published papers or journal. All disputes are subjected to the exclusive jurisdiction of competent courts and forums in Puri, Odisha, India.

All rights are reserved with the publisher of Media Watch journal. No part of the published items of the journal reproduced or copied in any form by any means without written permission of the Publisher or Editor. The views expressed by the authors are their own. They do not necessarily reflect the views of Media Watch journal or the organization they represent.