Independent Journalists

Kaitlyn Marshall

km934711@ohio.edu

Journalists are constantly questioned about whether or not they are really independent of those who they work for. As journalists and strategic communicators we have an obligation to the people, that’s a given for sure, however we also can’t forget where out bread is buttered as well. Sponsored posts and sponsored content are both big problems facing the journalism industry today. Citizens are angry because now it’s so hard to find out what is sponsored and what is not. Take for example a critique’s review of a local restaurant. The review could be very insightful, however if the restaurant is the one sponsoring the column or the specific review then that will affect the job that the journalist will do. 

We have to remember that we do need money in order to keep our column or paper afloat. 

As the reader, when we read the critical review or the article we may think oh this is a great restaurant, however when you see sponsored by (blank) it takes away from the overall effectiveness of the article. The reader then has to think about how and why the journalist was covering this restaurant in the first place. Where they coerced, offered money, or influenced in any other way? It definitely has a negative affect on the information that the journalist is putting out, because now the audience is less trusting of the information being presented to them. 

However, how can we fix this? Journalists are struggling to find ways to make money in an ever changing environment where almost anyone can be a journalist and you definitely don’t need a degree to do so anymore. Journalists are doing what they can in order to make money and to keep bringing individuals the content that they want, however what happens when we get so caught up in the money with sponsored posts that we lose sight of what is really important and lose our readers because they are tired of us advertising for these big companies, or any other companies. 

This is a problem that strategic communicators deal with at all times. They have clients and always have to keep the client in mind, yet they still have similar obligations to their audiences that we as journalists do. They are supposed to tell the truth and keep audiences informed, however they find the balance between representing their client and giving the public the information they need. This is difficult for journalists, because we are supposed to be unbiased while strategic communicators are expected to be biased to those they are representing. It becomes a balancing act for journalists more and more as we look to keep making money, and also trying to give individuals the information they need. There may not be a real answer to this question of how we keep our ethics as well as make money. However we can look for ways to make sure the audience is aware of our involvement with other companies that we promote on our website, paper, television stations, etc. 

Transparency Needs More Clarity

Makenzie Piatt 
mp689012@ohio.edu 

In ethical journalism, transparency is explaining oneself to the public. SPJ Code of Ethics states how good ethical journalists are expected to be accountable and transparent for ones actions. It seems as though transparency has become an ethical dilemma in itself because no one is sure if it will improve journalistic quality or acknowledge the mistakes.   Many bloggers, writers and experienced journalists have shared their thoughts on the effects of transparency. Even if a journalist is transparent, does it make the situation acceptable?

 

http://www.propertytribes.com/blog/top-6-in-the-property-transparency-league/

Be Truthful

Journalists have an ethical obligation to seek and report the truth. In an article in the New York Times, David Carr wrote about some companies creating news articles to endorse their brand. A very specific one he mentioned was with Verizon creating an article about the need for privacy on the Internet and introducing new technologies to create media property in social platforms. While the name of the corporation was on the article, it was at the very bottom of the story in an attempt to hide the real purpose. The company did not make the truth as obvious as it should have been, and even though the name was on the article, it does not make the situation acceptable to the people who eventually found out the truth.

Report with Caution

In an article written by Stephen J. A.Ward, he said, “ In its rightful place, transparency is a public good. But when transparency is ‘out of place’- when it’s over-hyped and replaces important values- it distorts the ethics of democracy and media.” Ward believes transparency can distort the quality of journalism and could potentially cause harm. He believes transparency cannot replace or resolve other ethical issues at hand. Journalists need to be honest about their intentions and acknowledge the way it may impact what is reported and how.

In a youtube video, “Transparency at Every Step”, award winning broadcast news producer, John Siceloff, stressed the importance of awareness and caution journalists should have when writing and reporting. When a journalists attempts to report and uncover a big and controversial story, anything they say or do can come back to haunt them.

Gain Trust

The public has a declining trust in news media. Articles such as the one written by Verizon creates doubt for many readers and concern for whether or not it is a trustworthy article or propaganda. In an article on Poynter, Tom Rosenstiel wrote about the different levels of transparency and how it affects ethical journalism. A big issue in journalism is getting public trust and believability.  Rosenstiel said, “Acknowledging your relationship to the information is an essential step in establishing why people should believe you. Without it, they should be suspicious.” Ethical journalists should be able to determine the sources and evidence to the story to gain the trust of the readers. Journalists need make their approach very clear. The public wants to be informed with truthful information, but journalists need to determine the appropriate amount of transparency needed for every story.

The Grey in Transparency

By: Justin McCauley
jm257310@ohio.edu

After reading both of these articles it got me thinking about the word transparency and what it truly means not just in journalism both in general. In journalism that word is one the the core values that we strive to live through. Journalist want to be known as a transparent source of news. That means that there isn't any source of non-sense that is involved with their writing or conveying of news. In general the word transparency normally means see right through it. Clear, concise, what you see is what you get. Now a days thats not always the case with journalism. Is it possible that the word itself has become less transparent then before?

As I was looking around the internet I came across an article talking about lying and transparency. The article raised the question is there a time and place to be transparent and a time to lie. You would like to think that the answer is black and white and is easy to figure out, but the real answer is not. It is fill with grey and clouds that isn't very transparent as it should be. When it comes to the public relations side of journalism they have a stigma of not always telling the story straight and being "transparent". Its not just the public relations field that has been getting flack nowadays its all of journalism taking that heat.

The public is quickly losing faith in the transparency of the journalism field always feeling like their is a higher agenda or an angle that is being pushed by on of these bigger companies. In the example about that site that is run by Verizon, it is just another example of these big corporations that are trying to gentle push their brand out there a little farther in medium that they don't much about and them not be 100% transparent in the process. These little acts of branding that these companies do only do more harm then good in my opinion. I think that if these little non-profit sites are done correctly then they can do a lot of good. (cc: Texas Tribune) It's just that there have been too many companies apologizing for funding these small sites that are trying to secretly push their brand. 

The term net neutrality is going away and while we were use to sites pushing certain products or things they were never publicly sponsored by these big companies. Nowadays the transparency of these ads are just going away and losing that clear and consciousness that we once knew. Part of it has to do with the social media and how they have expanded. These sites have now put in question is transparency the new objectivity and that is something that big corporations, journalist and people need to to understand. So the word transparency and what we once knew it as might have more holes then a slice of swiss cheese but I think that isn't how it has to be. Journalists and writers and learn to rediscover what that word truly means and hold it to that. They can regain the faith of the public but it starts by staying true to your values and ethics. It will not be a quick turn around, because this has been like a snowball rolling down a hill. I think that if their is going to be a generation to incite some major changes with all this new technology it might be the one that is about to get the reins. 

Too Much Transparency?

Jackson Phipps
jp888711@ohio.edu

In an age where the public is quickly losing trust in the media, transparency has become a buzzword that provides an answer to regaining the lost faith and some companies are taking the trend more seriously than others.  Transparency refers to the practice of revealing variables that may affect the reporting of a story as well as any other details that could mislead the reader.  These details include, but are not limited to, political ties, family connections, and other conflicts of interest.  However, the question may be raised discussing whether or not full transparency is actually beneficial to all the parties involved. 

Though the public wants to be as informed as possible, there are situations where withholding information may be advisable in order to maintain security as well as protect confidential sources. Not everyone is finding the transparency trend to be beneficial. For example, identities of sexual assault victims are often kept private to protect the victims.  Furthermore, should a writer choose to expose certain sources of information, those sources may be more reluctant to provide access to information the next time it is needed.  Additionally, military reporters must be very careful in their reporting so as not to expose the locations of important, secret military missions.  All of this is not to say that transparency does not have value, but if employed in the wrong way the consequences of too much transparency can override any potential benefits of being open about everything and everyone involved in the story.

                      Study from the University of Maryland

The issue of finding the appropriate amount of transparency is a concern for not only individual journalists trying to act on a sound ethical core of values, but also for major publications who often come under fire for being either insufficiently transparent or going overboard.  For example, the Times began to get questions when it was discovered that the newspaper withheld a story about the National Security Agency eavesdropping on Americans without court-approved warrants.  For nearly a year this information was not reported and as a response to public displeasure for their omission of information, they simply said that they delayed publication to conduct further reporting.  Executive editor Bill Keller was also rather tight-lipped about the matter and only issued a couple statements regarding the timing of the publication.

Transparency has become the trendy ethical value of the last few year and it is not hard to see why many news outlets see transparency as a way to gain faith from their audiences.  Before transparency was at the top of everyone's list, objectivity was the value that was to be held above most others when reporting news.  Unfortunately, even with objectivity being a main focus, many publications still were thought to be biased by many consumers and thus lost credibility.  News outlets have now decided that if all their work is transparent, they give the illusion to the audience that they are fully informed. In an age where information is so readily available, hiding anything has become more risk than reward.

Trendy Transparency

After reading “Why Hyping Transparency Distorts Journalism Ethics,” I have come to the conclusion that transparency, a core journalism value, has become an easy fall back. Currently, this “fall back” is trendy or fashionable among journalists. They think they can claim transparency and allow that to make up for the complete disregard of other core ethical values. But, according to the article, “Academic studies indicate that transparency cannot meet our expectations. Transparency, even where it is practiced, is insufficient to ensure ethical conduct, and may even lead to a risk-averse culture of management.” Transparency is just a part of what should be considered in ethical decision making and will find its place in an ethically developed news story.

This article also went on to describe that, “Independence is about doing journalism. Transparency is about showing how we do journalism.” And that, “Both arenecessary for good journalism.” Transparency does not need to become less important, but less emphasis needs to be placed on this ethical value. Independence also needs to be stressed, just as much as transparency currently is.

In conclusion, journalists need to develop their own code of ethics. This would help to prevent the favoring of a particular ethical value. Being ethical on one aspect does not mean everything in your story is ethical, or that you acted in an ethical way. Being able to have a checklist that can guarantee your behavior is ethical is important. It will make you’re a better and well respected journalist.  

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSP2EhE_56k

SPJ Code of Ethics Song

Conflicts of Interest are Everywhere

Hannah Debenham
hd550512@ohio.edu

In journalism, the goal is the report the truth, non-biased, straight forward truth. Well, in order to accomplish this goal, wouldn't the idea be to report on everything? You would think so, but even that can inflict bias on a story, which would lead to a tampered truth. This is because of conflicts of interest.

What is a Conflict of Interest?

Conflicts of interest come in many different forms, so many that sometimes it's confusing what is and isn't a conflict of interest.

Bribery is an obvious no in the journalism world. It should always be accepted and encouraged to go the lengths and put in the effort to find a source, but it should never be accepted to either pay or receive money from a source.  By paying a source you are choosing to manipulate a story. By accepting money from a source in order to be included, you are choosing to allow a story to be manipulated by a source.

Instead of taking bribes, consider your other options. If a source offers you money, look into the story and see if it is worth telling or if you are the right person to be telling the story. Do not offer to pay a source either. Instead, interview family or friends to learn about the source and narrow in on him or her.

Another form of conflict of interest is doing a story on something you are closely related to. It could be easy to take this story as you already have all the contacts and knowledge. However, by writing this story you consequently risk writing with a biased opinion, which would tamper with the truth of the story.

Instead of taking a story with which you are closely related, you should hand the story over to another writer. You are still able to provide contacts but it is important to stay neutral with stories.

                                             abc news

More widespread and overlooked are the cases in which the news outlet is associated with a certain company. When a news outlet writes a story related to a company in which they own or are in business with, then it would be unethical for to do a story on said company. This is because a company could have influence by threatening or putting their own people in to do the story.

Instead if a news outlet covers a story it shouldn't be a willing story for that company. It is important to cover news, but it is also important to cover stories without being biased. However, in some cases, news outlets should not choose to ignore certain cases in order to keep on good terms with a company. For instance, Fox News did not use the video of Ray Rice at first. A reason for this could be the football games that air on their channel.

Either way, in any news outlet, conflicts of interest will exist. The trick is to not let them stop you from publishing a story or encourage you to publish a story.

Applying Ethics To "The Paper"

Kirsten Kueser
kk500312@ohio.edu

                                          Henry (Michael Keaton) and Alicia (Glenn Close) in The Paper
                                                                   (Source: johnrieber.com)

Ron Howard’s The Paper explores the many ethical dilemmas that arise in journalism. The ethical dilemmas in the film range from the personal issues of a news organization’s employees, to the reporting of breaking news. In analyzing the ethical dilemmas that were present in the film, I referred to the Society of Professional Journalists’ Code of Ethics. I will address and analyze the ethical dilemmas regarding the first principle of this Code.

“Seek Truth and Report It”

Under this principle, the Society of Professional Journalists asserts “Ethical journalism should be accurate and fair. Journalists should be honest and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.” Throughout the film, journalists covering a story about the arrest of two African-American boys and the murder they have been blamed for. When lead character, Henry gets a tip that the police are covering up something about the case he interviews a police officer. Throughout their interaction, the police officer is unwilling to cooperate, yet leads on that he has information central to the case. Henry threatens to knowingly run wrong information if he does not cooperate. 

This is an ethical dilemma in that Henry must decide whether to remain professional and cover the story without his statement, or push the source for information using underhanded methods of gathering information. According to SJP’s guidelines, a journalist should “avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information unless traditional, open methods will not yield information vital to the public.” In this instance, the police had information that was vital to the public: the teenagers were wrongly arrested. Under SJP’s standards, Henry can still act ethically while gathering information in this unconventional manner.

By the time Henry learns the boys were wrongly accused, the original article without this information had gone to print. Henry attempts to hault the printing of the incorrect information and restart with the updated story. However, Alicia, a journalist that works above Henry, argues that the story was not wrong when it went to print due to the fact that they did not have the information at the time. Henry retorts that the news organization has “never knowingly published a wrong story” until this instance. 

The ethical dilemma that arises in this scene is whether to run an article that or to spend the energy and funds to reprint a story that could simply be corrected the next day. Also under this first principle is the guideline that journalists should “Take responsibility for the accuracy of their work. Verify information before releasing it. Use original sources whenever possible.” In referring to this guideline it is apparent that the ethical choice is to reprint and run the correct story in the first place. In knowingly publishing an incorrect article, the news organization would not be taking responsibility for the accuracy of their work. In addition, Alicia would be releasing information that is now unverifiable due to the new information available.

By the film’s resolution, most of the ethical dilemmas that occur are settled with reasoning similar to the guidelines provided by the Society of Professional Journalists. The ethical dilemmas  in The Paper are not uncommon among real news organizations and journalists.