Teaching Notes
You must become the flame on the candle. - Thich Nhat Hanh
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Is Media Ethics Education DOA?
It sounds like a joke Jay Leno would tell during his opening monologue on The Tonight Show. Hear about the graduate students at the prestigious journalism school? They got caught cheating on an ethics exam. Ha ha ha. Except that’s actually what happened at Columbia University
No one admitted cheating despite pressure from the school’s administrators and pleas from classmates, who feared the scandal would damage the market value of their degrees. Meanwhile, the teacher of the course, New York Times columnist Samuel G. Freedman, refused to comment. But if the disgruntled posts on RateMyProfessors.com are any indication, his students hadn’t exactly been soaking up knowledge. “Maybe he could e-mail his ‘speeches’ to the students instead of making everyone suffer through the most wasted class in j-school. . . ,” one read.
There’s an old cowboy saying that goes, “When your horse dies, get off.” Journalism ethics education is a dead horse. Or else those aren’t vultures circling in the sky.
No one admitted cheating despite pressure from the school’s administrators and pleas from classmates, who feared the scandal would damage the market value of their degrees. Meanwhile, the teacher of the course, New York Times columnist Samuel G. Freedman, refused to comment. But if the disgruntled posts on RateMyProfessors.com are any indication, his students hadn’t exactly been soaking up knowledge. “Maybe he could e-mail his ‘speeches’ to the students instead of making everyone suffer through the most wasted class in j-school. . . ,” one read.
There’s an old cowboy saying that goes, “When your horse dies, get off.” Journalism ethics education is a dead horse. Or else those aren’t vultures circling in the sky.
A Question for Socrates
The question of how ethics is learned, or even if it can be, is as old as Western philosophy. In Plato’s dialog Meno the title character asks, “Can you tell me, Socrates, whether virtue is acquired by teaching or by practice; or if neither by teaching nor practice, then whether it comes to man by nature, or in what other way?” Of course, Socrates, being Socrates, resists giving a definite answer. But we can’t. The sad fact is, students had better get an effective ethics education now or they may never.
Last summer I conducted an ethics workshop for some reporters and editors at the Poughkeepsie Journal, a small daily in upstate
But what I remember most is the air of defeat that clung to the staff as we sat on hard plastic chairs in the break room discussing the cases. I could hear in their voices the bitterness and cynicism of employees forced to follow corporate policies they despised. Recently, for example, the paper had started running display ads on the front page and section fronts, a much more grievous ethical lapse, their mumbled asides suggested, than anything the case studies might have to offer.
I don’t want my students to ever wear the gray, defeated expression I saw that day on the faces at the Journal. But given the downward direction in which the media are moving, and fast, how in the world can I prevent it from happening?
Teaching Media Ethics by Telling Stories
A friend of mine who teaches at a big Midwestern university recounts in class the events of her first week as a reporter for the Minneapolis Tribune. She was sent to Duluth to cover Democratic presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey on the campaign trail. When they were introduced, Humphrey vigorously shook her hand. “Oh yes, Susan,” he said, “I read your stuff all the time.” He couldn’t have read her stuff, though; she hadn’t written anything yet. “Just a few words,” she explains to her students, “but words that taught this fledging reporter a great lesson about pols and the little lies they tell.”
I usually find occasion during the semester to quote I. F. Stone’s dictum, “Every government is run by liars and thieves, and nothing they say should be believed,” to make the same point. But Susan’s story makes the point better. That’s because it has existential force. Her story vividly captures in a way a secondhand quote can’t the realities of a reporter’s life.
Some might think telling “war stories” is a waste of precious class time. I’ve a colleague who didn’t want to fall into the “trap” of regaling students with stories ad nauseam (“which, let’s face it, is easier than teaching or grading,” he said). So one semester he kept track. When he toted it all up at the end, he was surprised that he’d used less than an hour - out of 45 – talking about his newspaper experiences. And yet, he admitted, it was his stories that students seemed to remember most.
“Stories teach us how to live,” Daniel Taylor said in his essay, “The Ethical Implications of Storytelling.” What he meant was that stories preserve our experience for contemplation and evaluation. Although not all stories carry a heavy message, there’s an entire category of stories, so-called “exemplary tales,” that are told to convey a moral.
Our war stories are potentially just such tales. They can provide evidence, in ethicist John Barton’s words, of “how real human beings live through various crises and trials and remain human.” My colleague who kept tabs on his storytelling has described his stories as cautionary. Most, he said, deal with “screwups I learned from.”
But sometimes the storyteller and the audience can’t agree on what exactly the moral of a story is.
When Susan was a cub reporter on the Tribune, she interviewed the Beatles, who were on their second tour of the States. She got into their hotel room by dressing up as a waitress in an ugly, mustard-colored uniform and accompanying an actual room service waiter upstairs. Ringo took one look at her little plastic name tag – it read “Donna Brown” – and snorted, “What kind of name is that?” The waiter nudged her in the side. “Tell them what you real name is,” he urged. She did, as well as her reason for being there. Rather than throw her out, the Beatles politely answered her questions. They even let her phone for a photographer. The next day her story ran on the front page, with a photo of John sitting at a table and looking up at her and laughing as she poured coffee in his cup. She still has a glossy print of that photo somewhere.
Many of Susan’s students think she’s nuts for not having the photo hanging up in her office. They also think she’s nuts for saying she’d never participate in the same kind of stunt today. To her celebrity-struck students, disguising herself as a hotel waitress to get an interview with the Beatles seems soooo cool. They lose all sight of the fact that it wasn’t a story of vital public interest that demanded undercover methods.
Susan intends one lesson when she talks about her hard day’s night, but her students, living in a paparazzi-saturated culture, draw another. “It may be a lost cause,” she remarked to me.
Or maybe not. Negotiations over what the point of a story is can be part of the point of the story. In the process of negotiating, we test different interpretations, try out different themes. This is helpful. This is educational. Lawrence Kohlberg, the Harvard psychologist famous for his research on the stages of moral development, contended that “the teaching of virtue is the asking of questions. . . not the giving of answers.” Stories don’t necessarily have to yield clear moral rules to be of value. It’s enough sometimes if they just give us something to think about.
17 comments:
In assessing this, I think lines should first be drawn among the various forms of so-called "tabloid journalism."
On one hand, there are publications such as Newsday and New York Daily News which deliver the news in a relatively unbiased fashion, and which garner their "tabloid" status on the basis of the formatting at hand. A tabloid like The New York Post also aims to inform, but it does so with a conservative slant. It also makes use of more sensational, eye-catching headlines and fonts that you wouldn't necessarily find in a typical newspaper. Finally, you have what I might label the "supermarket tabloids," the National Enquirer-style pieces full of juicy, salacious (and perhaps not fact-checked) gossip and headlines.
So, I think there are different standards in accuracy and truthfulness when it comes to varying news media, though I might well argue that publications like The National Enquirer and Star Magazine aim more to entertain than to inform. In the case of The New York Post, however, it's a tad more complex, given it incorporates both news (though, again, often with a slant) and some of the gossip-focused elements of the supermarket tabloids (Page Six).
This extends to the television scene, too. Like the Post, you have MSNBC and FOX News, two news outlets which aim to inform, but with an ideological spin. Their argument would be that, just like a typical newspaper, the bulk of their news coverage is unbiased and without slant, and the partisan programming found during their primetime line-up is not unlike a newspaper's columns section. (Of course, anyone who watches either network would probably find a decent deal of spin or bias at any hour in the day.)
I think many news outlets, whether they'll admit it or not, basically set their own ethical standards. For some, like CNN and The New York Times, the standards at hand appear rather strict, and for others, like FOX News and The New York Post, the standards are a tad blurrier. And, of course, there are some publications out there (namely, the supermarket tabloids) which seem to set relatively low standards in ethics.
One of the things we're probing here is whether there's a minimum standard of truthfulness that journalism (no matter what form or technology) must attain to be journalism in fact and not just in name. Please look at the link on the blog to the SPJ Code of Ethics. What does it suggest? What does Borden suggest? Lorraine Code? Bok?
In terms of accuracy, it is the common belief that our news should come to us in an unbiased form, with truth and validity. Although this is a goal we wish to achieve, it is simply not profitable. In this day and age, with more and more newspapers suffering to bloggers and websites alike, the “news,” has turned a cold shoulder over to the truth and validity, and has followed a formula to ensure to catch eyes and ears. The news has set out to entertain.
Tabloid news is something that has been going on for some time, and although the consensus is that these stories aren’t real, the sad thing is the uninformed public believes what they read. Gossip websites and blogs have sprung up in similar fashion, whose sole purpose isn’t to inform us about what’s going on in the world, but rather to harass celebrities while they try and live somewhat of a normal life with their families.
Although I prefer news about real issues, through outlets such as CNN, and the New York Times, our country doesn’t always necessarily feel the same. Networks Fox News and MSNBC are both infamous for their allegiances to political parties. Although I consider myself more of a liberal, I still do not enjoy hearing one side to every story. Although I approve of President Obama, I still want to know about his flaws.
While many Journalists seem to be getting away with the bear minimum, I wonder their reasoning for such. According to the SPJ Code of Ethics, “Conscientious journalists from all media and specialties strive to serve the public with thoroughness and honesty. Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.” It is debatable to define what is “fair.” Is criticizing President Obama for wearing sandals on his vacation instead of talking about real matter of substance “fair?” Is spending more time covering Tiger Woods after his sex scandal “fair” as opposed to talking about the economy?
In our society we have cultural understandings of what to look for in different news outlets. The SPJ Code of Ethics should be applicable to all Journalists, no matter on television, newspapers, or the Internet. The truth of the matter is that not all Journalists are following this. Major corporations, that own a majority of media outlets, want news stories that generate interest, and unfortunately sometimes that interest comes with sex scandals, and not about our government.
I believe that all Journalists should follow the same ethical standards, but there is no punishment for not. Internet bloggers do so on their own free will, and there is no one to tell them what to say or what not to say. They cannot be fired. Right now people writing on the Internet have more leeway with what they report on, as opposed to the structured television, radio, or newspaper format. The fact of the matter is that the first amendment will prevail above the SPJ Code of Ethics, 10 times out of 10.
I'm sorry about my blog name I'm not sure how to change it for this class. But my name is Evan Brieff
I personally think tabloids are far from ethical. When I think of a tabloid I assume yellow journalism.
However, I think ethical standards shouldn't be lowered by any form of informative writing profession. I don't believe there are different standards of truthfulness and accuracy for different news media.
However, I do belive different news media outlets find ways around ethicalities to create entertaining forms of "news."
In order to sustain credibility and audience, a news medium whether it be print, internet, or television based, should have the same ethical standars that hold respect, integrity, truthfulness and accuracy.
Alicia is both correct and incorrect. Tabloids are not being held to the same accountability and accurateness as other publications. However that doesn’t mean that tabloids shouldn’t be held to the same standards as other publications in the field are. All journalists are supposed to report on the truth no matter who or what the subject is.
In a perfect world all news media would have the same standards of truthfulness and accuracy. Print, TV, and web journalists are bound by different ethical standards. In the print world, papers such as the New York Times, and The Daily News, both give the news in a non-partial and accurate views. On the other side of the print spectrum, tabloids such as Us Weekly, and In Touch print the “lives” of celebrities that a lot of times end up being fabricated. TV, depending on what news channel you are watching delivers stories with biases depending on their political affiliation. Web journalists are becoming more prominent in the field of journalism than ever. They are accurate depending on where you are reading. Online editions of print newspapers are more accurate than an average blog post.
The SJP Code of Ethics says that should report the truth. Many so called journalists today should take another look at this code.
I believe that Alicia’s statement, “the Sun doesn’t have to be as accurate as other papers because it’s a tabloid,” is both true and false. Tabloid journalists are known for, and often accused of sacrificing accuracy and the personal privacy of their subjects in order to boost sales. Tabloids have a strong agenda of scandal, sports, and entertainment yet they are still, however, active in campaigning for political issues and in most elections.
Tabloids are more like magazines than newspapers for they do not often truly provide factual news to the readers. The few "news" stories that make the tabloids are usually so outrageous and unbelievable that they are widely read for only entertainment purposes. Some articles can be so “out there” and extreme that no reader actually believes what they read; still these tabloids are sold off the rack on a day-to-day basis. I believe this is because some people just don’t want to hear about the news sometimes, because it is a lot to deal with and often hard to hear, so they need some form of unreal, entertaining news to get by.
All news media, despite their forte, should all follow the same standards of truthfulness and accuracy. For journalists, the most basic responsibility is to report the news accurately and fairly: to practice ethical journalism. It is all based on values; personal, professional, social, and moral. Ethical decision-making simply means applying these values in your daily work. Some tabloids do intend to maintain common journalistic standards, but may fall far short in practice.
I think that tabloids somehow get their way around ethical guidelines of journalism. I don’t see tabloids following the same standards as all other forms of news media because they are just not, plain and simple, the same type of news. They are not giving us the whole truth in their papers. This right there is already proving that they are not following the guidelines to ethical journalism.
I think that when it comes to tabloids, they tend to print what's relevant in our society in the present. That doesn't mean that it isn't news, but seeing what's popular appearing in different forms of media when it comes to news leads to often overlooking the real facts or stories that just don't show up in different media any more. Tabloids just feel less reliable, as a lot of times they want to post what'll sell. At the same time, tabloids have the ability to say something controversial moreso than other forms of media in order to sell, it feels like. They may not be the most reliable or source-filled, but sometimes it is important for a media to say something like that.
The standards of truth and accuracy are different, but it makes sense for them to be as different forms of media have individual ways of giving information to the public. Sure, the SPJ Code of Ethics says that journalists should be useful; but oftentimes nowadays it feels like journalists go to the same sources for news, and it all just feels the same. They'd rather go for what sells instead of sifting through everything. It's understandable they'd want to make money somehow, as it's become hard to in that field, but at the same time what isn't popular as news feels like it's becoming more of a niche market. People just want to hear news that's entertaining or interesting, but in the process that makes the news bland after a while. It can get sickening hearing the same story in differet media; and just because a lot of media use the same sources, it doesn't mean that source is possibly even credible or trust-worthy. In addition, it feels like a lot of times many forms of media don't show stories from both sides and stick to the one that they think people will most agree with. Although it's nice that they go along with popular opinion, it ends up making the media form feel like it's biased, which isn't what journalism is supposed to be about..
In journalism today there are certain publications that the public, and fellow journalists hold to a set of ethical standards (for example The Wall Street Journal, New York Times etc.) Then, there is the modern day media monster that has evolved into something so ridiculous that no one cares enough to question the validity behind their images, stories or claims. "Alicia" is one of the people who has been sucked down the media ethics drain and spit back out, therefore she believes that "the Sun", does not have to be as accurate as other papers because it is a tabloid.
This statement has the ability to be true, if, and only if a tabloid is publicly known to NOT be journalism, therefore it is not being held to any ethical code.The question then becomes not, what is ethical? but what is journalism? Because majority of the United States doesn't know the difference between a newspaper and a tabloid, and for the pure fact that these publications are technically reporting on people and events, it is hard to differentiate tabloids from the category of journalism. Furthermore an individual can't claim what is "newsworthy" and what is not, because everyone is entitled to their own opinion of what they consider to be important information.
(For example, I don't know about this Alicia character, but if Tom Brady impregnates another model I want to know! Furthermore it better be true because i don't want to look like an IDIOT on my Blog!)
That being said, all types of news media should be held to the same ethical standards. However that isn't just limited to reporting stories that are true. According to the SPJ code of ethics reporters are obligated to an array of ethical standards including Identifying sources, minimizing harm,showing compassion, being sensitive, showing good taste and being held accountable for stories. This is the area in which most news media lacks; And if all of these ethical standards were met we would all be deprived of lots of juicy gossip.
It is my belief that all forms of journalism should be held to the same ethical standards to be considered journalism. Therefore tabloids, and other petty news media should be classified strictly as entertainment; enlightening and informative as the good folk on the Jersey Shore. However that is unlikely to ever happen; This then leaves the audience responsible for being able to decode what is true, and what is pure entertainment.
Unfortunately, while it's definitely not right, it's become accepted (as well as acceptable) for publications such as The Sun to be far less truthful than papers like The New York Times. People know that by reading "tabloids", they're receiving a lesser degree of truth. While tabloids might suffer in terms of reputation, it seems almost unfair that one newspaper should be allowed to publish less factual information than another. It's unfortunate that a big part of "tabloids" is their entertainment value, which essentially shows that we need to fabricate or exaggerate the truth for an increased level of entertainment.
There are most definitely different standards in truthfulness and accuracy when it comes to different news media. While all journalists really should be bound by the same ethical standards, this is simply no longer the case. It's a journalists job to deliver the truth to the public, and it's really just odd how journalists would be held to different standards of truthfulness depending on the publication they work for.
In terms of print journalism, as said before, papers like The New York Times hold more weight and are expected to uphold a higher standard of accuracy than a paper like The Sun or The New York Post. Then there are also the magazine style tabloids, like Star, which are full of fabrications and exaggerations, really abiding by a minimum standard of truth. While obviously no one holds the Times and Star to the same standard, if they're both going to be considered journalism, there probably should not be such a drastic difference in accuracy. The content is of course going to be different, but does that mean it needs to be any less truthful?
The same holds true for television and online journalism. Channels like FOX and MSNBC are known for being somewhat biased while also delivering the news. There are channels though, such as CNN, which while not quite as entertaining, uphold the expected and appropriate ethical standards of truth. As for online journalism, with blogging being the latest news outlet, there are varying degrees of accuracy and it may be difficult to find blogs/news sites with accurate/ non-slanted news.
In the end, there are definitely different ethical standards in terms of truth depending on the publication. Different newspapers are expected to be more truthful than others, some new channels are expected to present news with a particular political slant etc. This has become the norm, despite the fact that all media should be held to the same standards. It seems that whenever there is less truth, it's to entertain the public more. While journalism does aim to entertain, it needs to inform while doing so and keep it's accuracy in tact.
According to the SPJ Code of Ethics, "deliberate distortion is never permissible", and it seems that this is across all platforms of journalism. Just to reinforce this message, it goes on to say regardless of place or platform. If you're a journalist, you're encouraged to follow these principles of honesty, accuracy and fairness. Alicia ought to strive for the truth in her articles and try not to mislead. However, we must take into consideration that, unlike the constitution, the SPJ Code of Ethics is not legally enforceable. Alicia is not committing a crime. However,she is subject to workplace penalties like termination or suspension. It seems, from the book's standpoint, she is the one mandating The Sun's position on truthfulness.
It's also important to note that tabloid journalism runs on gossip and rumors. It's a cash cow of journalism, most people are interested in Michael Jackson's alien baby or someone with two heads. Also there is a fine line between information and entertainment. Some stories, like those mentioned above, are so outrageous that they cease to have any journalistic integrity. This is a ploy to boost sales, when a platform is concerned about profits over anything else.
As the social network platforms go, we have entered an era of unprecedented media sharing and word of mouth campaigns, and with it comes encouraged disclosure and transparency. An article in The Boston Globe in 2009 says the Federal Trade Commission has issued new social media standards. This means that "Marketers will be held accountable if social media outreach and word of mouth campaigns do not result in truthful disclosure. While the new rules will be applied on a case-by-case basis, they state that the post of any blogger who receives cash or in-kind payment to review a product is considered to be a sponsored advertising message, and therefore may be subject to enforcement." Even on this platform honesty is encouraged even if it means that the government must step in. Since social media is relatively new in the workplace, to set up ethical guidelines right away is a great step forward.
I believe that Alicia is very much mistaken in her belief that tabloids don’t have to be as accurate as other papers. I thoroughly believe that all forms of news media should be structured by the same ethical standards. Her statement does however hold some truth in that in today’s society tabloids are not expected to be as accurate as other forms of publication. Tabloids are not held to the same standards of truthfulness or accuracy as other forms of news media.
Today, all the different forms of media are bound to different ethical standards. The standards are so different within each form of media that, for example, not even all magazines are held to the same standards. Some news mediums give accurate depictions of events taking place throughout the world; whereas other news media govern their “news stories” by what will bring them more viewers or readers. For example, Time magazine prides itself on displaying accurate information with validated sources whereas tabloids such as the National Enquirer supply unsubstantiated stories in order to attract readers.
Although it is true that there are different ethical standards of truthfulness and accuracy for each of the different types of news media that is not the way in which the news media should proceed. All journalists, no matter their stories’ content or who they report to, should report the truth to the best of their ability.
Alicia justified her decision to publish the “Gotcha” story by saying they would print the truth tomorrow, however, under the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics “deliberate distortion is never permissible.” Misleading the public for even one day is unethical especially since the truth is known as it was in this situation. Tabloids may be notorious for publishing exaggerated stories but they are still considered to be sources for news and should therefore follow the same standards as any other media outlet. Sometimes the truth doesn’t sell papers which is why tabloids hype up stories or print garbage about celebrities. Selling papers for profit is only in the interest of the publication only, not the public. According to the SPJ, “journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public's right to know.” This should be the same ethical standard for TV, radio, and the Internet but not everyone in the media cares about following ethics where money is concerned. I can understand if accusations and assumptions are made in opinion pieces whether that is in print, TV or on the Web, but the truth should be conveyed above everything else when it comes to news.
I think there is a minimum amount of validity that any form of media must reach in order to be viewed as journalistic.
Tabloids are violating many of the important goals laid out by the mission statement of the SPJ. So I think maybe the question is whether or not they should be viewed as journalistic, or news at all, rather than being grouped as gossip.
Yet from another standpoint, a standpoint of the citizens of the US, tabloids are a source of free speech, that aren't held to the same standards as other magazines because of the conceptions we as Americans have. Though some Americans may be unable to distinguish different magazines from each other, most can. If we were to find the gossip that's most often found in tabloids inside a newspaper such as the NY Times, people would be outraged. Because of our ability to distinguish an accredited, highly respected newspaper from a gossip column, we as a people don't hold them to the same standards.
Different types of media are similar, in that they all have different programs with differing levels of validity. Different programs are held to different moral standards depending on the claims they make, and the perceptions people have of them.
I think that tabloid journalism is unethical to an extent. Tabloids are daring practices of journalism that go above and beyond to give us information that we may not find out through non-tabloid publications. However, the flaw in tabloid journalism is that it may tend to distort the truth by use of bias (ex. The New York Post) or simply giving us news for entertainment that simply does not make us any more of an informed individial (ex. The National Enquirer).
According to SPJ Code of Ethics, journalists "should show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage." In most cases tabloid journalism is insensitive to those subjects that they are writing a story about. For example when TMZ goes out of their way to take pictures of a celebrity's children, that invades the privacy of the celebrity.
Tabloid journalism should know where to draw the line. We can safely say that everyone would love to know the truth, but how we go about obtaining the information and the validity is what matters. Our society fails when it comes to separating news for information and news for entertainment purposes.
I believe that Alicia's statement could be viewed as partially true but it would need to be very specific to the situation. Yes, there are certain tabloids that can publish information that is not necessarily true, however the general population knows that the news that they are reading is not a completely creditable source. Due to the fact that no one would actually believe what they hear from these tabloids there wouldn't be an uproar by anyone who this “news” actually affects. There should be a level of understanding among the public that if you would want straight factual information that you can depend upon, you should trust a medium that is more widespread and can not afford fictitious articles. For example, if you were to turn on the news that is being broadcast to millions of people the probability that the news being aired is false would be very unlikely.
At this day and age we are much more dependent on certain types of media than we used to be, for both convenience and popularity. One of the most popular forms of media today is through television, and it's no wonder why with the simplistic alternative to reading the newspaper they provide for the public. Although there is a still a large number of people that read the news online and gain their views from reading the newspapers. Members of any of these demographics know that the sources that they use are creditable and trust every bit of information that they read or hear. For journalists that make up these mediums that should mean that they only print information that is nothing but the truth.
I believe that all forms of media should follow the guidelines as the SPJ code of ethics suggests. It should uphold the most truthfulness and accuracy that it can rather inaccurate and invalid news.
Yes, there are some which are less adhesive to these code of ethics such as the mentioned tabloids. However, there are still some part of truthfulness within it. The readers of such tabloids and many entertaining forms of gossip and celebrity news in some parts of newspapers, tv shows, radio, and magazines must remember that these are made for entertainment and should not be taken as seriously as the news featured in CNN, NYtimes, and other broadcasting news channels.
Yet there are these differences, news media should be bound by if not same, similar ethical standards. Even though there is no guarantee that this can work effectively in this time and age because many of us are interested in entertainment, there should be a legitimate news story as the core.
In the end, it is up to the reader or the audience to choose what they want to know and should be able to distinguish from what is valid and invalid.
Post a Comment