Online Journalism Transforming Journalistic Standards

Kirsten Kueser
kk500312@ohio.edu

In a State of The Media 2009 Survey, “a solid majority (57%) say the Internet is “changing the fundamental values of journalism” rather than “transferring those values online.” Like radio, television, and print journalism, online journalism is its own entity. Just as ethical guidelines specific other mediums of journalism exist, online journalism needs a specific set of ethical standards to refer to. 

While all types of journalism share fundamental values, in order for them to be upheld they need to be amended to fit specifically to different mediums.

Accuracy

In the aforementioned survey, “When asked how it was altering the values, most (45%) cited a loosening of standards and less careful reporting” and  “25% of respondents [cited] the shift in values related to the growing emphasis on speed.” 

The fast paced nature of the Internet gives journalists the opportunity to post and stream content ‘live.’ Journalists must work at a fast pace in order to post content with real-time coverage. News travels fast on the Internet, and sloppy or incorrect news is no exception. Due to this fact, a reporter or institution’s credibility is more directly effected when they make a mistake. “The focus is more on getting the news out before checking its accuracy, and this is weakening journalism’s credibility. A reversion to checking and double-checking is needed, especially since mistakes can last forever online,” an online editor and content manager who participated in the survey wrote.

There are a number of different ideas on how to handle these journalistic mistakes. Some news organizations, like Buzzfeed, note their mistakes and follow with corrections. Others simply correct the mistakes later without acknowledging they were made. As stated in Stephen J.A. Ward’s “Digital Media Ethics,” “The ethical challenge is to articulate guidelines for dealing with rumors and corrections in an online world that are consistent with the principles of accuracy, verification, and transparency.” Regardless of the organization, online news must have some sort of ethical standard to refer to when dealing with corrections and rumors.

                             The New York Times lists articles that have been recently corrected on it's website. 

                             (Source: New York Times)

Citizen Journalism 

31% of survey participants cited “giving more voice to others and reducing the clout of journalists” as to how the Internet is changing the values of journalism. Due to how largely accessible the Internet is, anybody can post information, making it possible for citizens to report on news events. With traditional news mediums decreasing, and the use of online news increasing, “organizations are increasingly able, and willing, to collaborate with citizens in covering disasters, accidents, and other breaking news. Citizens who capture events on their cell phones can transmit text and images to newsrooms,” said Ward. 

While this relationship gives the public more of a voice in journalism than ever before, there are issues that arise from it. Citizen journalists may be biased, or factually incorrect in their reports. Not only does this discredit the news organization, it also presents the organization with an ethical dilemma. Does the organization require the same impartiality from citizens as they do professionals? Or does eliminating this bias and putting standards on citizens hinder their freedom of speech? This is why it is necessary for ethical guidelines specific to citizen journalism to be put in place.

Re-examining Ethics

Jaelynn Grisso

jg764811@ohio.edu

Open scene. In an office clearly situated in New York at a sizeable company. Dialogue begins. Two men sit on opposite sides of a desk, discussing the news. As your mind begins to let the dialogue fade into a lull passed the edge of conscience thought, you look at the man on the far side of the desk and his grin. His smirk.

This scene, in the 1994 film “The Paper,” may be the most accurate depiction of the competitive nature of news: the looked-down-upon journalist for a small, struggling outlet and the smug, entitled journalist at the well-established news outlet. More often than not, these roles are being fulfilled, even at the college level.

But then, of course, the ethical dilemma with the protagonist Henry Hackett’s actions during his job interview with the smug, entitled journalist. Without giving it any real thought, Hackett steals the lead story for the next day’s paper from the editor’s desk of the well-established paper. Even more, he then runs it in his own publication.  

While, objectively I don’t believe what he did was moral, I wanted it to happen. I wanted him to get the scoop and to bring the paper up with him. I wanted him to get the exclusive before the bigger paper. Stealing the lead, by any standard, was unethical. Yet, the audience (myself included) rooted for him the entire time, especially when he tells the smug competitor off.  We wanted him to steal the lead right out from under the self-aggrandizing journalist and effectively rid him of his smirk.

Perhaps it is because the manner of the journalist at the well-established paper is unethical too. While many wouldn’t think of a sense of entitlement and smugness to be inherently unethical, I think it can be. When a journalists began to take on these characteristics, they lose the characteristics that make journalism great. Stories start to become a means of receiving awards and gaining recognition rather than being about the story. Journalists begin making themselves the story rather than (as the cliché goes) giving a voice to the voiceless. They become the only voice.

While Hackett may have temporarily needed his moral compass realigned, he knew a good story when he had one, and not because it was going to garner attention for him. He knew a good story because it was a story that needed to be told. That knowledge is where journalism began, and that is where journalism thrives. Now, journalists need to step back long enough to have that epiphany. 

Is Media Criticism Warranted?

James Cornelison
jc077713@ohio.edu
9/3 Makeup Blog

While there are going to be critics present in nearly any venue, a certain amount of grievances a public may have will be reflective of the culture. Most criticism may well indeed be mindless regurgitation of popular talking points that one has heard just as the reading suggests, but to an extent that is worth mentioning, media bashers have one leg for their opinions to stand on that is significant. Anyone being paid for their work has a certain obligation to their work. News media is a huge, barely quantifiable, multi-billion dollar industry. And the reason for that is because of the enormous influence and obligation they hold to the public.

For centuries people have understood what kinds of power are held by the voices of mass media. It has inspired idioms like the "fourth estate" and "fourth branch of government" and "the pen is mightier than the sword." Historically, tyrants and conquerors alike seek to control the flow of information because when you can control what the masses know, you can control what the masses think. It can be used to support an agenda without any consumer even realizing what is happening. Most of our greatest inventions and achievements have been in regards to media and mass communication: the Gutenberg Bible, the printing press, radio waves, and the internet.

It is for these reasons and potential influences that I would agree with some media bashers when they say that professionals in journalism should be held to a higher standard than some of our more labor-oriented counterparts. Sure there is money, corruption, special interest, bias, and misrepresentation in any and all industries. But few of them have quite as much of an obligation to the public as they do their employers and stockholders. In the U.S. Constitution, we have our First Amendment rights to freedom of speech and the press, however the document says nothing else about the media at all. Regardless of whether or not something is established as a privilege, a public utility, an expectation, a government program, or an ambition in the hands of private enterprise, the same ethical responsibility exists. The powers that control the media does not affect the power that media itself holds. 

It's impossible to please everyone and live up to high expectations. But just as the media is a watchdog for other powers, consumers should be a watchdog for the media. And a higher standard of objectivity and professionalism should persist, however futile, to give both a goal for media to reach, and a standard by which to measure the effectiveness of those who control our flow of information.

What Kind Of Paper Is The Paper?

Jade Garcia
jg489111@ohio.edu

The movie The Paper really put me to thinking about what it would be like to be a Journalist at a big time newspaper. While I am not a journalist nor do I intend on being one, I had to wonder what it would be like to make the kinds of moral decisions that the characters in the movie had to make.  These decisions that the journalists make are no small task, they affect hundreds of thousands of people every day and can change people’s lives in a matter of 24 hours. That is why it is so important for journalists to have a good moral code and know how to approach every situation that arises on the job.

The ultimate test of moral code in the movie came with the hard hitting story of two young African American teenagers who were accused of murdering two wealthy business men. The story presented to the public was that the two young teens were guilty on account of the fact that they were found at the scene and would go to prison for their actions. It would be easy for any news organization to pick up the story and run with it, but instead of just printing the information that The Sun was being fed from the police, Henry Hackett decided to dig deeper into the case. By chasing down leads and securing quotes from prominent sources, Henry was able to prove the boys innocence. His actions represent the kind of journalists that we need in today’s society and also brings to light those journalists that have no moral code and would have acted as Alicia in the movie and let the paper run.

 Henry and his team could have let the story run as is and let the innocent boys pay for the actions of another man but they felt that there was something more to the story that wasn’t being told. The actions made by Henry and his team are the type of moral obligations that journalists are responsible for. Not only are they responsible for informing the public with truthful information but they are also responsible for those stakeholders involved in their reporting such as the young African American teens. When the paper with the wrong headline starts to begin printing to be sent out the next day Henry fights against the editor Alicia , who wants to let the presses roll out with false information pining the murder on the boys. While Henry ultimately wins it shows us the kind of behavior that happens behind the closed doors of newsrooms. There are always going to be journalists out there such as Alicia who care more about money than the real issues at hand such as an innocent man’s freedom and we have to be conscious and aware of the news we take in from these toxic reporters.

The Paper: Ethical Dilemmas

Kaitlyn Marshall
km934711@ohio.edu

The movie The Paper provides a lot more than just pure entertainment value for journalists. It's a pretty accurate display of the issues and problems that journalists must deal with everyday in order to make sure the stories that they are putting on the air, online, or even in print, are the best for their audience. Professional ethical dilemmas are at the forefront of everything journalists do. Anything that a journalist decides comes with some form of consequence and how they deal with those consequences shapes the art that is journalism for everything.

Obviously one of the most, if not the most, notable parts of the movie is when Hackett gets the scoop from the police officer basically saying that the two black boys they have claimed killed the men in the parking lot are innocent. Every other paper in town is running the headline that says these two boys are guilty. While we as the viewer know the boys are innocent, Hackett knows he has to run the story. His boss Alicia on the other hand wants to run the story they have and worry about editing tomorrow. This is a huge professional ethical dilemma. Choosing to knowingly run a story that you know is not right completely goes against a journalist's ethical code to do little harm to the public.

After the Boston Bombings when The New York Post all but convicted two suspects who later on we found out had nothing to do with the incident they faced backlash for weeks, and people still talk about how poor of a job they did reporting. The best quote I ever read about that mistake came from David Remnick, the editor of The New Yorker magazine saying "This is slapping on the front page of a newspaper with a wide circulation something not confirmed at all and it harms people's lives". Granted the New York Post had no idea what they were printing was wrong, but the same sentiment is still there. As journalists we have a responsibility to check and recheck and then check again to make sure the story we are bringing to the public is correct and to knowingly run a wrong story and to wait until tomorrow to change it is not the way for us to go. 

Another huge ethical dilemma that Hackett faces is when he steals the notes on the murder from the editor's desk at the Sentinel and brings that to the Sun. This wrong for a lot of reasons, mainly the fact that he stole information from one news source and then went so far as to bring it to the competition. As journalists, and kind of as people, we can't do this. If the story is going to come from us then it needs to have been researched and investigated by us. In order for the Sun to be able to put their name on that they needed to have done the leg work themselves. Later on in the movie they are able to get the scoop however when Hackett steals the notes from the editor's desk he loses a lot of credit as a journalist. 

Ethical Issues in The Paper

Katy Andersen 

ka100211@ohio.edu 

The Paper is a movie about a New York Sun reporter and his news team that uncovers a high-profile murder case and is racing to be the first to break the story.  However, within the first twenty-four hours from when the case was discovered to when the story was being printed, several ethical issues arose. 

The first ethical issue is that the City Editor, Henry Hackett, stole information about the case from the desk of another editor’s newspaper during a job interview.  This is stealing another persons’ work.  An ethical journalist should take the time to find out the facts himself.  The newspaper from which he stole the facts from knows that he did it and this not only hurts his reputation but also the newspaper as a whole.  Though newspapers want to be the first to publish the story with as many details as possible, it shouldn’t come down to stealing work. 

One important thing to remember as a journalist is to minimize harm when working on a story.  Hackett did not do a very good job of this when working on this story.  He caused harm to the paper that he stole facts from and he caused harm to his co-workers, literally physically fighting with his Managing Editor, Alicia Clark.  

Another ethical issue is the fact that Alicia approved the paper to print but would not suspend it as soon as she found out that the front-page story was actually false.  Henry found out that the two boys accused of the crime were actually not guilty and were set up because the police really suspect that the mafia was involved. The police allowed the boys to take the fall because they wanted to make people believe that they were on top of their game.  As soon as Henry found this out, he ran back to the newsroom to change the story.  Alicia did not want to stop the printing because a lot of money would have gone to waste.  Instead, she wanted to take the easier route and just apologize to readers the next day for publishing a false story.  Publishing this story could have completely ruined the two teenagers’ lives.   A good journalist seeks the truth and reports it.  Henry was persistent that the correct story be published and wouldn’t give up without a fight… literally. 

In the end, at the last minute, Alicia called off the paper, updated the story to include the truth and printed it on the front page, stating that the boys are innocent.  It turns out that the New York Sun is the newspaper to break the story.  Though they might have lost money by wasting the papers first printed, I’m sure they made up for them in sales by being the first to report the truth.  When people know they can count on you to report the facts, they are more likely to be loyal and buy your paper.  Being such a high-profile case, I am sure this story boosted the paper’s reputation. 

Finding the perfect balance

Charlie Hatch

Gh181212@ohio.edu

What’s the most important thing in life?

That’s a question that often goes unanswered, or may vary depending on the individual.

But it’s an important question for all people to think about, especially as journalists.

It’s no secret that journalists work like robots—long hours for little pay, often resulting in making sacrifices in life.

If journalists could learn anything from “The Paper,” it would be the ability to prioritize the most important things in life. But that’s something that a lot of journalists ignore or overlook.

During the film, when Henry Hackett (Michael Keaton) is offered a position at one of the premier newspapers in the world, the editor of the phony New York Sentinel says the job would offer better pay and better hours.

At this moment, another student turned to me and said, “Wouldn’t it be nice if we could just work nine-to-five?”

…

It’s an honest statement, but it’s also incredibly depressing as a journalist.

By working abstract hours, think of all the opportunities in life that are passed by?

For Bernie White (Robert Duvall), he sacrificed working at the paper in exchange of losing his wife, his daughter and her young, growing family. Is that worth it?

Even on a local level, what are the boundaries?

Is not answering calls from my parents or my grandmother really worth it if I can break a story on a women’s basketball paper getting caught for an open container? (This actually happened, but there were more negatives than positives to come out of the story if it was published.)

Obviously there are times when work is more important than something going on—maybe a birthday party—but it’s important that work shouldn’t become the priority in your life.

It’s understandable if it’s something important, such as President Obama announcing a new immigrant policy. What about a two-game suspension for a player who doesn’t see the court as much? Those are ethical questions journalists need to think about and answer.

Or, if you do think work is the most important, at least inform your family/spouse of what the new job promotion might mean.

From Virtual-History

There are plenty of ways for journalists to find that balance and perfect it. That’s a goal that all working individuals should strive to achieve.

When Hackett’s pregnant wife, Martha (Marisa Tomei) is stood up at a dinner date with her parents so that her husband can get a quote for a paper, she gets stressed and is carried out of their apartment on a stretcher.

Ultimately the wife gives birth and the husband’s paper has an exclusive story. Perhaps the signature moment is when they look at one another in the hospital room the next day and he realizes how significant family is to him.

He found that perfect balance.

We’re not going into journalism to make money; that’s a fact.  Well, we will, but not that much.

Journalists are going into the field because they love to provide news for citizens, and they’re driven by the need to know more information. 

Journalists need to be driven to find personal time as well.