The Freedom to Not Tune In

Sydney Dawes
sd983213@ohio.edu

Journalists constantly get flack for broadcast and print stories being pessimistic toward the government. We muckrakers highlight problems we see, but we don't provide a solution for how to address them. We complain about Candidate A. We complain about Candidate B. We point to corruption among wealthy members of Congress. We go on and on about net neutrality and other words most people won't admit to not knowing.

What if the American press wasn't allowed to criticize the American government, though? More importantly, what if the American government ran the press?

Journalism in Shackles

Because I live in a country with a press that isn't run by the government, sometimes I fail to recognize that privilege (or right) is not owned by others. In its first chapter, The Elements of Journalism describes a scenario in which a teenager in Poland wanted to listen to an edgy radio show that criticized communism.

Image via https://adalauk.files.wordpress.com/2015/03/freedom-of-the-press.jpg

This scenario, however, was not unlike what happened to many countries during the Cold War, and even today. Many governments sensor their citizens' media to spread a certain principle or idea to the public. Censorship is normally implemented in times of political instability, and can sometimes take the form of propaganda. For instance, during World War II, Germany went through an entire purge of literature, burning books deemed inappropriate for the future of the Third Reich.

I've always considered these acts of censorship as a form of oppression, but what I have not deeply considered is that these same acts can be transformed into a display of protest.

Tuning Out as a Form of Civil Disobedience

As described in the chapter, many civilians expressed disapproval for a government-run press by refusing to watch news broadcasts.

The citizens of the Polish town of Swidnik, for instance, would take their dogs for a walk in the park every night at seven-thirty, which was the time of the nightly news broadcast. Similarly, the people of Gadnak, Poland had a habit of turning their television screens to face the window, thus showing a blank screen. By showing that they were unwilling to listen to a government-run media, they were also demonstrating they weren't supportive of their government.

This portion of the reading demonstrated to me that our concept of the freedom of the press goes both ways: the press has the freedom to inform, and Americans have the choice of whether or not to listen. In other words, refusing to follow the news is not considered disobedient or rebellious. Defiance is not choosing to walk your dog during the nightly news.

Importance of a Free Press

The American press was intended to serve as the watchdog of the branches of government. American journalists have the ethical responsibility of helping in the process of checks-and-balances, and Americans are informed through the free media. The press has an incredible amount of influence over public policy and reform, but also the attitudes of Americans. A press facilitated by the government would be one voice giving information to millions of people. If you dislike the polarization of the media now, imagine what it would be like if only one set of views poured through it, trickling to every household in the States?

Ethical Journalism- Too Many Restrictions or Not Enough?

Vanessa Copetas
vc017013@ohio.edu

When the word "ethical" comes to mind many of us think of morals. To most, ethical decisions are the principles that you believe are "good", they describes your character and who you are/what you value as a person. However, "Moral Reasoning for Journalists" by Steven Knowlton and Bill Reader, give a different perspective on the word. "Ethical" is not necessarily a choice that is "good" but a choice "based on assumption, emotion or reflex" (6).

What I found interesting was that the chapter really touched on very prominent figures that we now look up to as delinquents. When we think about breaking the law, we immediately believe this is bad...but take important individuals who made a difference, such as Reverend Martin Luther King Jr. Though he broke laws that seemed unjust, a seemingly "unethical" action, we admire his movements towards equality.

Recently, journalists (and public relation professionals as well) have been on the end on receiving many complaints for their actions. The chapter discussed that with money on the line, a need for a larger audience and viewers, pressure to make your client look good and taking a political bias, many journalists harm their integrity and their company by not complying with a journalist's moral code.

So what exactly is this code? According to the Society of Professional Journalists they, "strive[s] to ensure the free exchange of information that is accurate, fair and thorough". They pride themselves on seeking the truth and reporting it, minimizing harm, acting independently, and be held  accountable and transparent. While the so called "good" journalists look to comply with these values, the "bad" ones seek out readers over truth, or harmful information over the emotions of the reader.

On the other side, those in public relations also need to be sure they're providing the truth to their audience. Being credible is highly valuable in public relations, but what happens when you slightly stretch the truth or choose words that do not convey what you absolutely mean? In an article labeled, "Is PR ethical? Only when its practitioners are" author, Shannon Bowen argues that power can "corrupt" those in the public relation field and they can fall victim and be lead them down a path of immoral decisions. "To be ethical communicators and leaders, the power of public relations should be used to empower others – to facilitate wise decisions through providing information, by making a range of options possible and actionable, and by serving the interests of society – as well as those of clients" (Bowen). In a way she is right, having power can "corrupt" us. The point of public relations IS to be persuasive, so you highlight the strong suits of your company. However, as a student studying public relations, I would argue that showing your audience the assets of your product or client is not immoral, though lying and fabricating is.  Therefore, if the power goes to our head and we make our subject sound so much better than he/she/it is, then we could be lying and break the values of true public relation practices.

Of course there is a blurry line. What happens when the unthinkable happens and a never before seen event occurs? Is it morally correct/ethical to post videos and pictures of people who are dying or the aftermath of an event? Morally, maybe not, but if we take Knowlton and Reader's view on ethics, they might say that they are informing the public of what they should know and provoking an emotional response to an event that must be reported on. Though we might not find it acceptable and even find it disrespectful for victims of tragedies, it seems that if there's a reason to show it, it is ethical.

As Allison Cook brought up in an earlier post, there was a lot of controversy over a picture of a man who jumped out of the building during the  events of 9/11. Similarly, in the same event a phone call was recorded and the call goes as far to hearing the victim scream "Oh God!" right before the line cuts off and the building falls. Is it fair to release a phone call that provokes an emotional response to the audience? You can argue yes or no but overall it depends on the victim (in this case, the victim's family) being okay with the release and the journalist's own personal beliefs. As long as there is nothing too graphic (such as a video of a victim being killed) and the facts were all found ethically, journalists shouldn't be too restrained by the media.

Freedom of the press is something the United States prides itself on, but when the line crosses over from what the public deserves to see and what is too much, it's time to take a step back and reevaluate.



http://nucleardiner.com/2015/01/03/sunday-comics-15/

To be Ethical, or not to be Ethical: Story Fabrication

Sarah Blankenship

sb856312@ohio.edu

What is important to you as a journalist? Are you in it to make a lot of money or to get attention? Maybe you want to make a difference or make people see things in a new light. How far would you go to make sure your aspirations for your journalism career went far?

In the 2003 film titled "Shattered Glass," Stephan Glass finds himself in a position of power in working for The New Republic and starts making some unethical decisions to get some attention. Steven Knowlton and Bill Reader in Moral Reasoning for Journalists shared, "Critics are saying that journalism has lost its way, that it no longer provides honest information in a form that readers and viewers can use." In the film, Glass fabricates multiple stories and brings himself plenty of attention before being brought down by the truth.

It is ironic that the newest story on The New Republic's website at the time of this post is also about changing the facts and keeping the truth from the public. Is everything that is going on in the world getting so boring that we have to make up or spice up our stories? When readers go to the stands or to their favorite news apps and websites they are trusting that what they read is the truth. We have the freedom of press and it is our duty to tell the public the truth.

Another case of story fabrication and downfall happened at the New York Times in 2003 with Jayson Blair. When stories like this surface it must make readers suspicious of what they are receiving from all news outlets. When the shock of these incidents dies down everyone goes back to everyday life as we know it and hope that it doesn't happen again.

Steven Knowlton and Bill Reader also make note, "... in the cacophony of press abuse (and, too often, self-righteous self-defense from journalist themselves) little constructive action is taken." Should readers pay more attention to the facts behind the stories they read?

In this day and age readers don't have time to fact-check their stories. They are on the go and shouldn't have to stop to think twice. To have a functioning society everyone needs to do their part. Journalists get the facts and shared them so that everyone else can stay informed; it should be as simple as that.

In the closing of the reading Moral Reasoning for Journalists, it states "... many working journalists consider what they do to be more like a calling; they think of journalism as both the bulwark of democracy and as the last and best defense of individual rights." Just as in any other profession or any situation in life, there are going to be people that lie to get ahead. It is not only in journalism and the news, but everywhere we go. All we can do is be skeptical and choose to make ethical decisions in our walks of life for the good of ourselves and the rest of society.

Social Media Not Interested in Ethical Journalism

Natalie Chatterton

Nc322312@ohio.edu

In today’s society Journalism, the media and ethical reasoning do not have a great reputation when spoken together. We have seen this reputation tarnished through coverage of protests, government officials, and more recently the presidential election. This reputation is also due to issues like confirmation bias. In the assigned reading titled Moral Reasoning for Journalist by Steven Knowlton and Bill Reader, these authors state “the broad assumption seems to be that journalism ethics is a contradiction in term. Yet, research today suggests journalists today are more concerned about professional ethics than in any time in the past."

If research suggest journalist are concerned about ethics, why does this industry still stand with a negative reputation?

In today’s society, most individuals retrieve their news and information online, which is a great way to reach a max amount of audiences almost instantly for news outlets. So you can imagine the competitive spirit for news and media to be the first source with the information. This rat race causes issues among online users and credibility.

One recent incident we can review is the Pulse Night Club shooting in Orlando, Florida.

When this tragic shooting occurred, immediately journalists and news outlets took to social media to document what they thought they knew, prioritizing prominence over accuracy. An article titled 10 Things The Media Got Wrong in Reporting Frenzy Over Orlando Shooter by Virgina Kruta explained that the posts online varied from what weapon the gunman used, the gunman’s motive, whether he had accomplices, to even tweeting the body count of the massacre. These posts and tweets were all inaccurate in certain ways at the time of the post, spotlighting the stigma between moral reasoning and journalism.

The Ethical issues among this case are clear, the journalist and news outlets were more interested in having the information first that they sacrificed moral reasoning, and credible information for their reputation in the middle of a tragic massacre.

The terrorist attack in Paris, France qualifies as another great example of how credible journalism on social media is put behind stories that will receive more publicity.

In an article by CNN titled Debunked: What Social Media Got Wrong about Paris Attacks by Kerry Chan-Laddaran and Justin Lear, the authors explain certain instances that projected completely false information.  For example, in the article Chan-Laddaran and Lear explained “A video titled ‘Muslims around the world celebrated the Islamic victory in Paris, France, ‘purportedly showed a crowd of young Pakistani men dancing and waving their nation's flag outside a London tube station.” When in fact this video of the men dancing was after Pakistan won a cricket match in 2009.

The media portrayed that instance to millions and millions of people on social media who were following these attacks. Having information like that misconstrued to the public is an ethical dilemma within this industry. This field is focusing more on the entertainment aspect of news and information and disregarding ethical and sincere moral reasoning to communicate important and, most significantly, accurate information to the general public.

https://sharesilentlyoutloud.wordpress.com/tag/citizenship/

Ethical Entertainment

Julia Brown
jb863113@ohio.edu

Why do ethics matter today?

In the time of the 24 hour news cycle, why are ethics important?  Isn't it more important to get a story out to your readers before anyone else instead of stopping to think about the ethical implications a story may have?

But ethics are still important. They create a sense of credibility and authenticity for the publication, building a deep-rooted bond between author and reader.

According to “Moral Reasoning for Journalists,” the press wields a lot of power and has many constitutional rights, and “abuse of that power can have disastrous consequences for their governments, their societies, and their major institutions.”

But what happens as it gets more and more difficult to maintain a reader’s attention? What happens when the lines between journalism and entertainment become blurred?

Entertainment Journalism

In order to keep readers’ attention in this world of ever-changing media, news outlets have had to adapt to the constant transformation of broadcast, print, and web-based journalism, which is dictated by what people are interested in right now.

An easy and obvious way to adapt is to look at what types of media people consume outside of the typical journalism outlets of, say, a newspaper.

As MP3 players and smart phones have reason to popularity, so have podcasts. According to the Associated Press Style Guide, a podcast is a  “digital media program, in audio or video form, that can be downloaded or streamed to a computer, smartphone or portable media device.”

One of the more popular podcasts, “Serial,” is blurring the line between news and entertainment. The podcast examines the 1999 murder of high school senior Hae Min Lee, and the later conviction of her ex-boyfriend Adnan Syed.

An article from The New Yorker claimed the podcast combined “the drama of prestige-television-style episodic storytelling [with the] the portability of podcasts…”

Photo from: http://dudeslovethis.com/serial-podcast-returns-season-two/

But is that what we want?  Do we want our news presented to us as an episode of reality television, no different from the new episode of “Keeping Up With the Kardashians”?  Or is there a way to maintain listener interest while still adhering to basic journalistic ethics?

The Ethical Issues Within “Serial”

“Think Progress” examinedthe ethical dilemmas that are posed by a podcast like “Serial”. For example, the podcast uses several storytelling tactics that are rarely seen in typical journalism, like cliffhangers and personal asides.

The podcast has become as much about the way it's being told as it is about the actual story that's taking place. 

“Serial” is also a story that has yet to have a true conclusion. Throughout the first season of the podcast, reporter Sarah Koenig would release information to the listeners sporadically as she uncovered it, without putting the whole puzzle together first.

From left, Dana Chivvis, Emily Condon, Sarah Koenig, Ira Glass and Julie Snyder of "Serial." Photo from: http://www.wsj.com/articles/serial-podcast-catches-fire-1415921853

This has the potential to create ideas or doubts that turn out to be baseless and false. “You don’t want to be giving voice to things because they’re plausible, or they’re possible, if they turn out to be false,” said Edward Wasserman, dean of the University of California Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism.

Wasserman also cited the problem of reverb: “the problem of the reporting she’s doing now interacting with the reporting she’s going to do tomorrow.”

What Now?

So why do so many people cry out that journalism has lost its way, yet they continue to lap up this story with many obvious ethical oversights?

Perhaps that’s because it addresses the other issues people have with the media: “it’s shallow; it’s boring; it panders.” 

The future of journalism lies in finding a way to promote the story that needs to be told in an entertaining way while preserving the ethical values that have given journalists the important reputation of being the watchdog for the average person.