Is it Ethical to Call Out the President on Lying?

Katrina Kopronica
kk821516@ohio.edu

"All politicians bend the truth to some extent, though such communications typically earn passive descriptors such as "untruths," "falsehoods," or the like. The argument is that it's impossible for journalists [to] get inside a subject's head to gauge intent. With Trump, for example, it's difficult to say whether he is actively deceptive or just so shamelessly unprepared that it gives off the tangerine-colored aura of deception.

Photo courtesy of musicismystory.wordpress.com

For years protocol in journalism has been to steer clear of the word "lie" when covering the Commander-in-chief. The current political climate, however, is changing this age-old rule.

Many news outlets have taken to covering President Trump with all regard to following the rule out the window. Vox described one of Trump's stints as "blatant lying." The New York Times posted a story about Trump's "trillion-dollar lie." The editor even put out a statement saying that they "decided to be more direct in calling things out when a candidate actually lies...it is a real word and we will use it as warranted." So in a time when the movement is shifting away from being politically correct in terminology, what is ethical?

"Newsrooms have wrestled with how to characterize the misinformation Donald Trump spreads since the presidential campaign, when his eyebrow-raising statements tended more toward "pants on fire" than true, according to at least one fact-checking site. This challenge is only intensifying with Trump in the Oval Office, and backed by an administration eager to provide "alternative facts" when the actual facts don't flatter the president."

  Of course there are plenty of valid reasons to avoid using the word lie. Lying implies that someone intentionally fabricated something, they had intent to deceive. As journalists we know you never presume someone to be guilty of something. But where does that cross the line with our current president? You have outlets like NPR that still avoid using the term lie, and then you have The Times who have posted multiple stories about Trumps lies, using the word straight up.

At some point it is fair to say something is a lie. The Washington Post wrote that 'when the president states falsehoods that have been contradicted numerous times by well-distributed reporting - sometimes directly to him in interviews and the like - it's fair to reach the conclusion he lied."

The political climate has had a huge effect on the media as is, both negative and positive. And in a time when so much is changing it's fair to assume that rules on how to cover "lies" could be tweaked as well. When covering someone especially as eccentric as Trump, it is fair to call him out on lying when, as stated by The Washington Post, what he said was contradicted several times by reliable sources. We have reached a point where people seek the truth more than ever, and if the truth is that the President is, with all intent, lying, the people have the right to know and as journalists it is our duty to report that. Of course, you must always be careful doing so, Don't claim something is a lie until you have enough proof it was with intent to deceive. But when you do have the proof, it is absolutely ethical to inform the pubic on what they have the right to know.