eh233614@ohio.edu
In the article Checkbook Journalism's Slippery Slope, Ryan Chittum said, "We've long known that his (Robert Murodch) outlets tend to play loose with- or ignore altogether- the rules of journalism, such as they are." Now, this is a scary statement. While it is referring to outlets paying sources as a way to obtain sensitive information, it can apply to other ethical dilemmas as well. In an age where journalism is desperately trying to earn the public's trust each day, it is important to talk about outlets that aren't behaving ethically. Their decisions and behavior can have lasting impacts on the industry as a whole: it's like taking one step forward and two steps back.
Personal Relationships
 |
| Courtesy: longreads.com |
One conflict of interest that comes up everyday for journalists in all markets is having a personal relationship with sources or people they are covering. Chittum said, "Sometimes all it takes is a behind-the-scenes comment to influence a story." This is important to consider because it is not always as direct as people imagine. It may be a colleague that is married to the person you are investigating or covering. You are exposed to your colleague every day. This exposure to could have an impact on you as a reporter, whether you realize it or not.
Many journalists, especially leadership of big media operations, claim that this conflict of interest is under control and reporters are able to regulate themselves. But the question of how they should regulate themselves is not as easy as it sounds. Is there really a way to actively eliminate these conflicts of interest when they seem to be everywhere? Even though journalists will claim there is no "evidence" that personal relationships influenced their reporting, what does that really mean? The word "evidence" is vague and there is no way to measure how much your relationship are truly influencing how you tell a story.
This conflict is not exclusive to national news networks and the White House. Local journalists live and work in the community. If it is a small town, the journalist will develop relationships with interview subjects and government officials on personal levels the same way other professionals in the community do. For example, a doctor who lives and has a practice in a small town will develop personal relationships and friendships with their patients. This is unavoidable even for journalists whose line between friendship and independence is harder to distinguish than doctors. But what is there to do about it? If you work in a small town, you cannot isolate yourself from people in the community outside of work. Frankly, you would not be a very good journalist.
The Solution
The solution is transparency. It's a common theme when thinking about how to solve many of journalism's problems. By acknowledging the possibility of a conflict of interest up front, and then acting on personal integrity, you become more equipped to address biases in your writing. If you simply act like a personal relationship doesn't exist, it could influence the objectivity of your work without you noticing.
By identifying and disclosing a conflict of interest early, the audience will be more inclined to trust the journalist. With this level of transparency and explaining decisions, the audience can judge for themselves if the reporting is biased. Even better, transparency will hold journalists more accountable to self regulate. If they understand that the audience will know about their relationships before they start reporting, they may be more inclined to act ethically and realize they may not be able to be involved.
No comments:
Post a Comment