Teaching Notes
Wednesday, April 20, 2011
Empathy
Is Media Ethics Education DOA?
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.
13 comments:
Upon reading this, I sought out a larger photo of Breughel's "Fall of Icarus" to observe any miniscule details or nuances. What's amazing, upon a close look, is how every single presence around Icarus is wholly indifferent to his plight - note how even all of the sheep are faced in just about every direction besides toward Icarus. The ship sails obliviously past Icarus, while the fisherman, who stands just feet away, seems more fascinated by the water. It's as if the community is obsessed over the technical element of "good work," performing their tasks in an efficient, focused, distraction-free fashion; this boy emerging from the skies may be a captivating event, but it shan't warrant consideration when there's work to be done.
In reading W. H. Auden's "Musee des Beaux Arts," I sensed an aura of resentment from the author toward the intense apathy at hand.
He writes:
"In Breughel's Icarus, for instance: how everything turns away
Quite leisurely from the disaster; the ploughman may
Have heard the splash, the forsaken cry,
But for him it was not an important failure."
With this, Auden concedes that the villagers have, in all likelihood, at least taken notice of Icarus's fall, but are so intent on completing the tasks at hand that such an event, monumental and tragic as it may be, doesn't warrant a hint of attention. With the usage of "leisurely," Auden seems to see a nonchalant indifference consuming these players, whereas a veering into crisis mode would perhaps seem more appropriate.
To relate "Musee des Beaux Arts" to journalism is to equate the apathetic villagers, willing to let a boy drown, with reports who aim to veer away from empathy. "Journalism and the Victims of War" examines how this sense of apathy may prove tragically flawed, especially during wartime or humanitarian crises, where strategically remaining on the sidelines is perhaps not only normally wrong but wholly unethical.
This chapter focuses on the film "Welcome to Sarajevo," which is based upon the experiences of Michael Nicholson, a journalist who covered the tragic atrocities of the Bosnian War. Nicholson began his work with a sort of stringent journalistic mindset of "cover the news, but don't get personally involved," but, over time, found himself empathizing more and more with the war's victims. By the end, he was saving lives.
This, of course, is precisely what is not at play in Breughel's painting. Everyone seems dead-focused on the tasks before them, as if they're sporting ear plugs and completely incapable of feeling any reaction to the cries from the water. Nicholson went into his work aiming to utilize the most intense and strict of focus, but eventually found himself overcome with empathy.
I took the poem, "Musee des Beaux Arts," and applied it first to something we recently talked about in my journalism class. Today's society, at least my generation, turn's their head to news, important news. Instead of nkowing what is going on and caring about events, they turn their heads and act as if nothing wrong has ever happened.
After reading the chapter, one quote specifically caught my attention. Anna Quindlen stated "reporters are often asked about thier obligation to readers, perhaps the most important obligation is the one we owe the subjects of out sroties, whose lives are limned by our words, for better or for worse."
Empathy is more than merely trying to understand someone, its actually an out of body experience. One has to remove themself from their frame, their body, their mind, and try to open their soul up to an experience they possibly would never imagine being in or never have been in.
In order to properly report a situation, reporters need to show some empathy to give life to their subject.
With the poem, a numbness comes forth. The poem shows no emotion to me, instead a for instance turned into a social norm of ignorance.
This also reminded me of the story about the woman who was murdered in NYC, where there were so many witnesses, who didn't move a muscle. The people were too busy going on with their lives and too concerned with themselves, that they couldn't reach out. There was no empathy in their souls, only greed and fear.
If a reporter doesn't show empathy, and treats a story with factual information and no emotion, the narrative is off. There is no rising action, there is no climax, there is no story. With empathy, a reader can be pulled into a life that they would never have understood. The reader is given a chance to learn, to understand.
A journalists' job is to remain impartial about his or her subjects. In the chapter from the book, it talks about the movie "Welcome to Sarajevo". This movie was about Michael Nicholson who was a journalist covering the Bosnian War. The journalist starts out in the movie by being impartial and having a just report, don't get emotionally evolved state of mind. Throughout the movie, he felt empathy toward the victims of the war. At the end of the movie, he was helping to save lives.
In the poem, Auden seems to dislike the journalist mentality. The idea that no one moves to help Icarus displays how a journalist can report on tragedies, while doing nothing to help.
This poem describes the Greek myth about a boy, Icarus, who flew with wings stuck together with wax. Icarus flew too close to the sun and melted the wax and he fell into the sea and drowned. The poem describes how people around him witnessed him fall and saw him drowning in the ocean yet they did nothing to help him.
This story relates to a journalists dilemma of feeling empathy for others comes when the journalist needs to decide if they are merely at a place to observe and report, or if they should feel empathy for those around them and help out when needed. In your chapter, you described a journalist who was in a war zone surrounded by people wounded civilians. When the journalist began to help drag the civilians to safe areas another journalist told him that “We’re not here to help, we’re here to report”.
Should journalists be allowed to feel empathy for others? It is a journalist’s job to be impartial to those around them and report on what they witness. If a journalist remains separate from the situation and emotions of people around them then the journalists’ story remains unbiased which is a key aspect of journalism.
It's interesting to note that this poem by W.H. Auden was written about the "Fall of Icarus". However, it's not a very good example of people acting with a sense of empathy. Icarus flew to close to the sun with his wax wings and plunged to his death into the sea below. It's interesting to get another perspective, namely those that witnessed, yet did nothing. Auden, in my personal opinion, writes about how the dogs go on with their doggy life, but this could mean the people with their tasks. They have been dehumanized because they failed to react to the plight of human suffering and death. These people by the sea are a contradiction to the Judeo-Christian model of treating humans as humans, and not as instruments, or in Icarus' case, stones cast into the sea.
They ignore the screams, before I believed Icarus had died instantly, and the splash. It's almost disturbing, how even the ship, most reasonably Icarus best chance at survival, sailed on. These people could have been interchanged with those at the apartment building that witnessed Mimi die in Queens. It's very easy, according to the painful lessons of the last blog post, to be an inactive bystander. However, we've also learned that it only takes one person to act. And that one person can alleviate human suffering.
Michael Nicholson does just that in the Sarajevo Conflict, in the chapter "Journalism and the Victims of War". He had a goal of objectivity, but his empathy got the better and he started to get emotionally involved. Therefore, I don't understand how In Auden's poem, "everything turns away quite leisurely from the disaster." These are theoretical people, but a symbol that maybe human suffering is too much to digest so they must process it by turning away. This is the way they deal.
Maybe getting too emotionally invested is harmful. I remember reading a story about a journalist in the Bosnian conflict who couldn't re-integrate back into normal life. He head was in the war, and everything else seemed lack-luster. He had given too much.
Empathy is a concept that many are not too familiar with. Society has always embraced the mentality that one only has to look out for themselves. So when a person is suffering around you it is normal for a person to continue moving on because “that’s life.” Both the reading and “Fall of Icarus” by Breughel show instances in which people have failed to show empathy for others.
Throughout the semester we have discussed many scenarios in which people have forgot that their first and foremost role on this Earth is to be a person. What is supposed to make us human is that we have feelings and are supposed to show compassion other, or at least acknowledge others. We have discussed how people will pretty much sell their soul and do whatever it takes to get ahead in their profession, so why must they be empathetic to others? If more people were fully aware of their surroundings feeling empathy would not be so much of an issue. In the reading the reporter was more focused on getting the story than helping the people suffering around them. In most situations there is always something more important than making the ethical decision. “We’re not here to help…We’re here to report.” The reporter was not there to help the people around him, however how can a person see someone suffering and just turn away? People like Henderson are contributing to the problem of feeling empathy.
The poem also relates to the problem of feeling empathy because although everyone saw Icarus falling from the sky, no one stopped to help or even look around. This poem reminded me of the story of Kitty Genovese story where people heard something so intense happening around then and failed to even call the police. The poem provides a great example of how one is too preoccupied to open their eyes to their surroundings. A person is falling out of the sky into water, and not one person can even turn around to see if he is okay, instead they continue sailing on. This also demonstrates how numb one can be to a situation. The failure to feel empathetic is often followed by the statement “that’s life.” Someone will always need help so it has become part of life seeing suffering and continuing on like nothing is wrong. Often one is too concerned with what is going on in their life that they don’t even show an ounce of compassion for the people around them. If helping another is inhibiting the progress of a person most likely that person will not help.
Both the reading and the poem relate to the problem of feeling empathy because they depict scenarios where the obvious choice should have been to show empathy however that was not the outcome.
"...and the expensive delicate ship that must have seen
Something amazing, a boy falling out of the sky,
had somewhere to get to and sailed calmly on."
The poem "Musee des Beaux Arts" depicts a familiar scenario that we often see throughout our lives. In a society where empathy has become esoteric and forgotten and where we continue to carry on living our individualistic lives, there is lack of compassion for the well-being of others.
Just as in the poem where Icarus plummets into the sea to his death, the people who notice this keep going about with what they were doing and ships continue to sail on. Similarly, in the chapter, Flynn is considered unprofessional as a journalist and out of place for helping the wounded woman in Sarajevo. He is reprimanded by the quote, "we are not here to help." However, the person who reprimanded Flynn, Henderson, develops sensitivity towards these suffering people and eventually shows "a humanitarian gesture in an inhumane situation" by saving the children.
As philosopher William Frankena notes, "we usually go our own busy and self concerned ways, with only an external awareness of the presence of others, much as if they were things, and without any realization of their inner and peculiar worlds of personal experience." Just as we learned in the Kitty Genovese case, it could've only taken one person to start a chain reaction to stop the murder, but the lack of empathy amongst these witnesses had halted them in doing so.
What does empathy have to do with journalism? Empathy is now lost and buried in our society. Sure, journalists are supposed to remain unbiased, however, empathy should be kept in mind in order for journalists to really make a difference. As Burton L. Visotzky states, "it is the whole point of moral education to be able to imagine being in another's position." If journalists want to write effective and meaningful news, empathy should be considered.
"To show empathy is to identify with another's feelings. It is to emotionally put yourself in the place of another. The ability to empathize is directly dependent on your ability to feel your own feelings and identify them." (http://eqi.org/empathy.htm)
Empathy is something that not everyone is capable of showing. Some show it and some don't, it is not something we can easily adept to. In W.H. Auden's "Musee des Beaux Arts," we see another example of when showing empathy for others has failed.
We as a people are the "dogs who go along with their doggy life." We see these terrible stories on the news whether it be in visuals on television or in print on paper, and we keep on going with our lives. We may be distracted for a short period of time, but do we really empathize? No, we sympathize, and feel bad. We don't put ourselves in their shoes, we are thankful that we are in our shoes.
It is interesting to debate, as it does in the chapter, whether journalists should become emotionally involved in the stories that they cover. It is almost really tough not to get involved sometimes, especially in the war stories in the chapter. As a Jew, I couldn't imagine reporting on the Holocaust and not being emotionally involved in the story.
I feel that journalists should know when the time is right to step in and let their emotions become one with the story. There are many times when it is important to stay impartial, but it is almost dehumanizing in certain situations to not become involved. But sometimes, too much involvement can be a bad thing. In the end, a journalists' job is to report on the stories. It can become too much to handle emotionally if it becomes alot more than that.
The poem, along with the painting that was included, displays that human beings may know of empathy, but we practice apathy instead by turning the other cheek. In relation to present day news, we are so accustomed to hearing of news that involves murder and war, however something about our nature does not allow us to feel the pain of the victims or their family members.
I feel as if this makes us more inhumane than ever; robots in society with no soul. When it comes to the chapter on victims of war where the journalist tried to help and was told "We're not here to help, we're here to report," this right away supports my belief. Journalists are conditioned to become machines; to report what is going on during times of turmoil and think nothing of how fallen soldiers are suffering.
I also found it interesting that the writer of the chapter mentions in the beginning how they were looking for "empathy" in various media ethics textbooks, but could not find any material dealing with the subject. As ethicists, shouldn't we at least include empathy in our field? If we claim to be human beings on this Earth, and moral human beings at that, empathy should be something that is included within the code of ethics for journalists and PR practitioners, or whomever works for the press.
Auden's poem pretty plainly addresses human apathy and the fact that suffering, which is ever occurring, somewhere in our world (just not necessarily in our lives) goes unnoticed or flatly ignored each and every day. The poem is about the failure, whether intentional or a bi-product of "self preoccupation, or absorption in an ongoing task" (such as the expensive, delicate ship with someplace else to go sailing calmly on) to recognize this suffering and to do something about it.
This clearly relates to the issues of 'objectivity' raised in your chapter of the text, but "Journalism and the Victims of War" raises the stakes, in my opinion. In Auden's poem the world is guilty of not noticing or ignoring Icarus' plight. In the text the wartime journalists who insist that they're there to report, not to help, are venturing a dubious step beyond ignoring... they're using the suffering that is apparent before their eyes to "do a job"; to get a story and earn a paycheck.
Clearly, the journalist who feels this way - that their job is to remain objective and detached; to report the facts without intervening, helping or becoming emotionally invested - is an unethical drone and regardless of what they tell themselves about the "ethics of impartiality" they are either craven or greedy and heartless, only in journalism because it pays as well as the next job.
What's made clear in the text, through a myriad of quotes from Nicholson, Gjelten, Rieff, et al is that compassion and the ability to empathize with the subjects of your reporting - to imagine yourself in their place and try to feel what they feel - does not, or should not compromise one's ability to be objective. Often it is said that in order to be fair and just reporters must remain impartial, but what's fair and just is not always equal; objectivity isn't meant to mean treating all sides of a story equally; it's meant to report without being informed by a previous bias or outside interest. Being unwilling to save an otherwise helpless individual from harm in the name of maintaining objectivity is not professionalism, it's a cop out.
This poem “Musee Des Beaux Arts” by W.H. Auden refers to the mythical story of Icarus, a boy who flew to close to the sun with wax wings and fell to his death. Everyone simply stood and watched without any attempt to help the boy.
In relation to the chapter in your book, it shows how empathy both does and does not come into play. It discuses a reporter whose job is to report on war. When human lives are at stake, he tries to save them by dragging wounded civilians off to a safe area the. He was then told by another journalist that his job was to report on the war, not to get involved.
I feel that empathy should not be an option for journalists to participate in when reporting on a story. Some say that if the person gets involved then they are all of a sudden bias. News Flash: All stories are bias and so are all papers. They don’t just have a responsibility for reporting the truth. They have a responsibility for human kind. By not using people as a means to their end.
It reminds me of the Kitty G. story that we listened to in class. The woman was murdered but so easily could have been saved if one person went outside to help or called the police. The fact is, is that we have a responsibility to our people as a whole. To get a good story doesn’t mean that we have to stop caring. The news has become so cold and heartless with the ways in which people are told to write them and how fast they are supposed to have them finished. Behind these stories are real people and real situations that affect those people. To be empathetic would have a more positive affect on the ways in which we should consider writing. In my opinion, it even should be considered an epistemic responsibility to write with empathy.
The poem “Musee de Beaux Arts” illustrates the trait of human apathy, which in a journalistic sense can be confused for objectivity. The poem, which is based on Breughel's painting “Fall of Icarus,” is similar to it's inspiration as it depicts the continuation of life despite the suffering of others around them.
This obviously made me think of instances in class where we discussed situations where viewers apathetically move on with their lives rather than acting upon it. The author of the poem expressed disapproval towards the ploghman for walking by
even though he heard a splash and “forsaken cry.”
Nicholson, who was the subject of the books chapter for his portrayal in “Welcome to Sarajevo,” starts his coverage of the Bosnian War by being impartial and factual, without getting emotionally involved with the war. However, throughout the movie empathy overcomes Nicholson and he becomes integral in saving lives.
Some people may believe journalism forces those who are covering a story to be apathetic and emotionless while covering a story. This is not the case in any sense of the word. One of the above commenters brought up narrative and it's importance. I could not agree more that it is directly intertwined with a journalists emotional attachment to a story.
The real test is the journalist's ability to separate these emotions from spilling over to a story and effecting it's objectivity. In all honesty, I think it's horrific for a photographer to be put into a ethical bind for wondering if they can help a starving child before taking a photograph. In my mind, you are allowed to have emotions, but you need to be able to keep those emotions in check when it comes time to put pen to paper.
Journalism does not force someone to become a stone cold statue who spits facts out to the public. In fact, many times the power of pen can change the world more than humanitarian efforts. Writing and not acting is not a form of apathy.
The poem really touches upon the idea that so many people just look on, observe and go on with their lives when people are in trouble or struggling and exhibit a startling lack of empathy.
I think the line of the poem that sticks out most to me in terms of this topic is "Its human position; how it takes place While someone else is eating or opening a window or just walking dully along..." That tragedies occur right in front of us and we often times are preoccupied or just ignore it. Especially in terms of journalism, this is prevalent.
What I gathered from the chapter on empathy is that there is a time and place for a journalist to give in to empathy, and in fact it is their moral responsibility to empathize in these sorts of situations. In situations of terrible wars shown in the chapter, it is a journalist's duty to fairly report the event, which does not mean showing everything 50/50, but rather using empathy when it's necessary and appropriate in order to potentially spark a response or change. Journalists are the prime examples of spectators that merely stand aside and watch what they say, not interfering no matter what, but there are times when this objectivity must be set aside.
Post a Comment