Who's to judge?

Flannery Chapman
fc362911@ohio.edu

Who decides what is ethical and unethical?

The topic of ethical journalism is brought up on a regular basis in politics, news, and classroom settings.  The main issue that has been found is what really is ethical?  Who has the last say in an ethical debate?  Is it not the journalist's decision to decide if he or she is being ethically correct?

It is hard to have a concrete answer to such questions, but there is no law to ethics.  Law and ethics, in fact, are two separate rulings that can occasionally intertwine in their jurisdictions.  For example, it is illegal to commit homicide and it is also ethically wrong to kill another human being.  However, if one had killed another human being in self-defense is it still ethically wrong?

The vagueness of ethics causes many people to have particular ethical beliefs, and in turn one may argue that journalists have no ethics because specific articles, broadcasts, or media that a person views is not to the ethical standards that person upholds.  This is not always the case.  Yes, it is true that some media may address things against politicians or celebrities request not to, but in some cases it is for the better of the public.  A journalist has the right to the first amendment, just as everyone else in the United States and there are times when the public must be informed of information that it may not like to hear, such as political scandals, health epidemics, and more.  There are also cases where information is released to the public that is not remotely correct or important to the public eye (i.e. tabloid magazines).  In a study preformed by Gawker in September of 2010, it found that only one of five tabloid magazines  delivered a little more than half of its overall stories with complete accuracy.
 

But are tabloids actually a source of real news and media?  When was the last time US Weekly wrote an article about the political elections if it was not about Michelle Obama's newest look?  When was there not a claim Jennifer Aniston was finally pregnant? When was the last time TMZ was not releasing paparazzi video footage chancing a celebrity out of a bar?  These types of journalistic media are not for news and information.  Tabloids are purely for the entertainment aspect that people pretend are over rated and rude, but secretly read on iPhones before the next class or meeting or work break.


Are people confusing tabloids for their source of news and information?  If one bases journalistic ethical rightness and wrongness off of entertainment news and media, then that is where the judgment is off.  Many times, however, even tabloids have shown ethical standards by revoking leaked information and making public apologies.

Deep down every person has a "moral compass" which allows one to decide if something should be right or wrong.  That compass just varies from person to person and it appears
nearly impossible to have one specific ethical ruler.

A true journalist knows that one must always deliver the truth, but the truth is... sometimes the truth hurts.  If the truth is something people do not like one may consider it unethical to release the information.  Journalists are constantly debating what to report and what to conceal.  There is always one person who will not like what a journalist delivers, but if it is the truth isn't that all that matters?

The Society of Professional Journalists has an entire section of Ethics Case Studies, where students from universities all over have posted their own articles about ethical issues found in journalism.  No matter how much research is done to establish ethical rightness versus ethical wrongness, there will never be a conclusion with a specific answer.