Ethics Tutorial- Poynter News University
1. A few of the case studies seemed especially important to digital media. The story regarding the inmate father was important because the piece discussed the lack of context. I thought this was relevant because of how much social media has affected context in journalism. Most often people claim that social media has speeded things up so much that context can no longer exist. However, in this situation, I believe that social media would have allowed for better context. The piece could have been aired and then those criticizing it could also be heard.
The next case study I found relevant was the piece on drug addition and prostitution. I found this relevant to digital media because it seemed as if the whole point was that a piece like it had never been created. The idea of putting an actual face on these issues had not often been brought into reality. With digital media and the way that journalism is heading, this will soon be a very common practice.
The case study I felt was the most relevant, however, was the piece about the abortion activists. The idea about not airing the images could almost be seen as a problem of the past these days. Of course, it is unlikely that the photos would show up on the NY Times website but it isn’t exactly a problem of journalistic accuracy considering the journalist can be all but certain that the photos will be available somewhere else.
It is obvious that any of these case studies could be related back to digital media. Personally, I found the case study involving the 911 call to be the most engaging and important. It really highlighted for me that the important aspects of journalism will never change that drastically and that it’s likely that the problems with these aspects will probably also always be difficult. All news can be adapted to new ways of reporting but it is also true that many of the old axioms are still incredibly helpful.
2. I found the ten questions to be a very helpful and to the point way of practicing ethics. Not only do they help out with the journalistic process in general, in questions one and two, they help with remembering the sort of “golden rules” that we all were supposed to pick up in fourth grade. I appreciate having someone highlight the importance of them considering how often it seems that people forget their importance as time passes.
The question posed involved how to actually use these rules this quarter. I believe that questions seven and eight are rules that I should use constantly and not just journalistically. The idea of realizing consequences, positive and negative, are constantly around the corner is incredibly valuable and the idea of “doing unto others as you would have them do unto you” is something that, if more commonly practiced, could easily end every problem our world has.
Question ten was the most interesting to me. It really highlighted just how often people ignore their actions so as to further their own outcomes. It isn’t very often that someone has put their entirety into something and the idea of having to actually hold yourself accountable is sure to make you work harder and more carefully. This question is important, again, not just in journalism but in any endeavor.
Question three was also very important. I believe that it completes the list nicely. It could easily have been left out of the list but instead it makes sure that you begin the process with your head in the right place.
The list of Ten Questions is incredibly helpful to any ethical decision and I appreciate the possibility that it is a list many others are guided by. Often it might seem like you’re doing the right thing because you’ve either seen others do it or because it matches up with your moral code. A good example of this might be that you always believe the public should know the truth. However, your gut may tell you to tell the public everything even if the situation calls for a more carefully-handled situation. Visceral reactions very rarely take into account the maturity involved in understanding that the world has many shades of grey. It is incredibly important when wielding power as great as journalism to realize this.
” 1. What do I know? What do I need to know?
2. What is my journalistic purpose?
3. What are my ethical concerns?
4. What organizational policies and professional guidelines should I consider?
5. How can I include other people, with different perspectives and diverse ideas, in the decision-making process?
6. Who are the stakeholders — those affected by my decision? What are their motivations? Which are legitimate?
7. What if the roles were reversed? How would I feel if I were in the shoes of one of the stakeholders?
8. What are the possible consequences of my actions? Short term? Long term?
9. What are my alternatives to maximize my truthtelling responsibility and minimize harm?
10. Can I clearly and fully justify my thinking and my decision? To my colleagues? To the stakeholders? To the public?”
3. Digital transparency can easily impact all of these principles and it can be in positive and negative ways.
A good example for positive ways this transparency can change things involves the principle of acting independently. It used to be much more difficult to tell if a reporter or newspaper was acting of its own volition. In the digital age, however, you can very easily track these relationships and can see when things are getting into foul territory. Bloggers, especially, these days are often receiving gifts from companies that want them to “review” their products. New laws have had to come into place to make digital transparency more effective and one can only assume that it will only become even more important in time.
As far as negative examples go, the obvious contender would be the principle of minimizing harm. It used to be very important to take into account all parties and figure out the best way to make sure that everyone got treated respectfully no matter what truth was getting reported. This principle also involved concepts like leaving people’s “dirty laundry” off record or leaving the innocent parties as protected as possible. In the age of digital transparency, these concepts are impossible to accomplish. People are thirsting for complete knowledge and there is always a way to get it. There is no more “off the record” and a story never stops with the one journalist.
While these principles are just as important as ever, it is up to the journalist to find new ways to make them effective in a new world.
