Now, looking at this story without having any journalistic knowledge you might think how sweet and considerate it was of Song to do this for the sake of the girls and their families. But, in the eyes of a journalism professional Song crossed a line, “violating a basic tenet of journalism by participating in a story she was supposed to be observing as a reporter, as an outsider,” Rosenberg states. I think it is important to mention Song became an activist on the topic and not a reporter and in the eyes of Rosenberg if you can cross one ethical line it is that much easier to cross another.
This event was looked at as an unacceptable conflict of interest for Bronner and the Times due to the fact that the New York Times company policy on ethics in journalism states, “that the activities of a journalist's family member may constitute a conflict of interest.
Hoyt explains that, “Bronner occupies one of journalism’s hottest seats, covering the intractable conflict between Israelis and Palestinians. As the top correspondent for America’s most influential newspaper, everything he writes is examined microscopically for signs of bias.” I believe there is a biased on this topic and in the defense of the New York Times and the position Bronner holds he should be asked to stop reporting on this topic.
There is a word used among the music industry called payola which can be described as “the practice of bribing someone to use their influence or position to promote a particular product or interest” which is relevant to the issues among music critics. In an article titled, Payola: Influencing the Charts Heather McDonald writes, “Payola, which is sometimes also referred to as "pay for play,” is as old as commercial radio, but it really took off in earnest with the advent of rock music and profitable rock music radio” this a tactic that has been used for many years now in this industry and isn’t slowing down anytime soon.