Emily Beekman
eb491810@ohio.edu
Chapter 1 of Knowlton and Reader’s Moral Reasoning for Journalists is what I expected to find when coming into this J3200 ethics class, sans the extensive history lesson. We all face tests of our moral reasoning every day, but journalists know that their careers, and almost more importantly reputations, depend on the soundness of their moral and ethical decisions. The first few pages of this chapter and the categorical assumptions of the supposed media corruption in today’s society found me, sadly, almost convinced.
As a public relations major, I now see ethical issues in the field that I heretofore missed. Is the industry driven primarily by money and spinmeisters? Most would conclude "yes." In this deadline, profit-driven society we often must make decisions as quick fixes; and we may feel we are helping the client without realizing the public may have been duped.
Has journalism has “lost its way”? We all know which cable news channels are blatantly conservative or liberal. Are news shows becoming more concerned with ratings, circulation and advertising revenue, foregoing honest information for entertainment and sensationalism which draws more viewers/readers? It has become desirable for newspersons to have an identity which may be provocative, even sarcastic or witty. The delivery is almost more important than the message, to keep good ratings.
Some journalists are not living up to their moral charge to report the news ethically, and their attention is not focused on what journalists should do, how they should do it and why. Is this a call back to philosophical roots of a teological moral approach toward good outcomes?
A listing of behavioral norms and guiding principles, journalism’s code of ethics, which includes honest reporting of facts from both sides and transparency of sources, now needs examination for relevancy to new media. Journalism is now a mixed news media environment, with amateurs as well as professionals using broadcast, print and social media. This mixed-media journalism requires rethinking ethical guidelines to apply to reporters whether they blog, Tweet, broadcast or write for newspapers. Journalists must identify and address ethical tensions between traditional journalism, which values accuracy and balanced views, and online journalism, characterized by immediacy, a particular viewpoint, and untrained as well as professional journalists. The concept of conflict of interest is now blurred, and an increasingly complex use of images brings its own ethical dilemmas.
Another emerging
journalistic ethical issue may not even involve “true” journalism: the emergence of celebrity entertainers in a
news role. The Peabody Awards actually honored
Jon Stewart and The Daily Show for coverage of the 2004 presidential election,
citing "its unmatched wit and unorthodox approach in putting (the election) in perspective without diminishing its importance." Stephen Colbert of The Colbert Report
follows the same mostly non-journalistic, even comedic relating of news. The author contends that Stewart and Colbert
do not hold themselves to moral and ethical traditions in journalism so that
they can have a role as media critics, criticizing with humor other journalists. They “chat” with newsmakers, as do late night
comedy shows, rather than do original reporting, and manipulate sound bites and
images for the maximum effect. The
author calls this presentation "fake news"; they present a warped version of today's news while also critiquing it. They are not deceiving the audience; they are admittedly comedians. However, their role is important in revealing
what is unsaid “between the lines” and illogical in mainstream news. In addition, their humor identifies with the
audience point of view rather than the typical remoteness of newscasts. Overall, because Stewart and Colbert present critiques
based on journalism’s moral commitments, this consensus actually identifies
common ground between the comedic pair and their journalistic counterparts.
No comments:
Post a Comment