Ethics in Journalism

Ethics. The wonderful world of ethics. It seems that in the communications major, students take not just one, but multiple courses on ethics. Obviously there is a strong reason why we must understand and focus on ethical practices in journalism. Its one of the biggest issues in the profession. 

In class, we talked about being accountable for what one says. Yes, everyone will admit to saying things that they regret. In this profession, its impossible to take back something once its been said because it is printed and broadcasted for all to see and hear.  As the Elements of Journalism says, journalists will need "to exercise their personal conscience". As humans, we are built with the knowledge of right and wrong. There is no better time to exercise that then the time of practicing journalism. 

Ethics also involves things like plagiarism, fairness, bias, etc. and all of those topics have their own rules and outlooks to others. If you look at this code of ethics and the New York Times' Code of Ethics its easy to see what is expected in the biggest journalism corporations world wide.

By minimizing potential harm to the public or to our work place, we will gain more successful positions and jobs by being able to distinguish between what is acceptable and not in journalism. In the Mind of a Journalist, it says that we need to act independently and be free from any obligation so that we can judge for ourselves and our own work. By doing that, we can all hold ourselves accountable for what we believe is right to print. 

--Kim

Investigative Journalism

Unfortunately, I was gone last week for a broadcast journalism trip with BYU to the MWC Tournament. I didn't get to participate in the Jeopardy game, but I did get to go out and experience journalism in the real world, with real journalists (not that BYU students aren't REAL journalists, but you get the point).

Investigative journalism   poses a lot of interest to the general public. To many, investigative journalism is the only form of honest reporting. This could be said because to the viewer, they see the reporter as someone under covering things that are deceiving to the public. 

Here is an article that states how the art of investigative reporting is slowly decreasing, especially from larger networks. With lawsuits being common in today's society, investigative journalism is becoming more and more risky. A great example of this can be found here, where the author talks about the potential harm and obstacles that can occur during investigative reporting. 

Yesterday in the Comms 300 class on media and ethics, the topic of recording others was discussed. A great point was made about whether or not undercover reporting would fall under the unethical category. I found a link that relates to the points that were discussed. 

To me, investigative reporting is fun. It takes work and makes the job entertaining. However, with that being said, there are many fine lines that undercover jobs contain. Whether or not I would be willing to take the risk to report undercover would depend on the topic. It would be a thrill, but there are only two ways the story can end; great, or in tragedy. 

Investigative journalism is a lost art. We see it less and less in today's society--but when it does appear on networks and TV, it usually makes for the most interesting stories. 

Journalists and Ideology

The class activity helped solidifiy the points of the lesson in my mind. Each organization is going to have an opinion and sway towards what they will run as a company to viewers. 

While ideology is different than bias, its a journalists job to make sure they are following the organization that they work for and their ideals without having bias. This is a fine line, just like some of the other points we have covered in this class. 

To make sure as a journalist things are being told without bias, the reporters ideals will need to shine through in their writing. 

I found this blog that helped me understand how that could be achieved a little bit better. They touch on the fact that ideals are different from bias. Ideals are more like values that people believe and live by. Bias is only telling one side of the story and refraining from hearing or learning from the opposing side. 

Its a slight difference, but as a journalist things are key. This is a great example of someone showing bias, as opposed to their ideals.  

As a summary, its important to note that bias and ideals are two completely different things. Bias= bad and ideals=good. As a reporter, its important to define your own ideals for your own specific reporting style. I know i'm starting to learn and develop mine. 

Independence and Journalism

I think the activity we did today in class summarized it all. I liked splitting up in the groups and deciding each viewpoint of different groups through out the country. Most importantly, it brings up the point that as journalists, we have to be free from bias and have an independent point of view. 

All of the different groups had a different outlook on the situation. I think its a valid point that was made that everyone will view situations differently, and different news organizations will portray the situation differently as well. Thats how loyalty is gained within an organization. 

Diversity I feel was a great point to touch on as well. That is why America is so great! We have different people with different viewpoints and different thoughts. That is why its essential for journalists to be independent like this link shows. 

As we have talked about every week, it will be hard for a journalist to withhold from sharing some sort of their opinion in their stories. That is why its so essential to make sure all of the facts are covered, and verification is performed like we talked about the last class. 

My group had the opinion of the muslims in our class activity. Coming from that stand point really made me think about what I as a journalist would have done in that situation. I think it was a very good discussion and I think that if everyone had to take a look at the muslim point of view, things would have played out differently. As a reporter, I am going to have to try and think about the opposing view on every story. I'd hate to make a group of people feel neglected or abused because of a certain take on a story. I can't help but feel that happened for that group of people in New York. 

Being independent in journalism is another key step in being a true journalist. All of our aspects have really tied together and solidified a great definition for journalists to be defined by. 

The Profession of Journalism

I think today its easy to be called a "journalist". Anyone with a blog or a twitter account could easily say that they are a journalist. But, here's my opinion. To actually be able to consider yourself a journalist, I believe you need to have credibility. You need to have some sort of a reputable past. Just because someone has a blog or a twitter account does not deem you a real-life, honest to goodness journalist. Here's why. 

Look at this blog. Its just a regular blog, talking about someone's life. Does that deem this person a journalist because they post their stories or opinions on a blog? Here's a secret. It's my personal blog. By looking at it, would you consider me a journalist? No. There is nothing on there to make anyone consider what I had to write about the day of "journalistic value". 

This blog, however, talks about journalism and opinions. Does that make this author a journalist? In my opinion no, and here's why. 

I think just because someone decides to create a twitter account or a blog with their opinions, does not make them an actual journalist. My views may be skewed because I am actually getting a degree in journalism. I'm working hard and paying money to get a degree so I can call myself a journalist. I don't believe people with blogs like this one, really are true journalists. Yes, their opinions are discussable, and even valid. But if thats the case, there are thousands of journalists in the world. Thousands. Then why on earth am I going to school for journalism? 

I think its important to recognize that journalism is an expounding market. There are things like blogs and twitter and the internet that people have never been able to truly access before. This makes getting facts and opinions out quicker than ever, making journalism a fast paced, competitive market. But again, I feel like just because those options are out there does not make the authors of them, journalists. 

This blog, for example, is a perfect example of a journalist as an author. Credible source, journalism background, and reliable information. 

Lets say Kobe Bryant made a blog. He is a big name. He is someone who is marketable. If he writes on his blog, does that make him a journalist? No, that makes him an athlete with a blog. Does what i'm saying make sense here? He has a twitter. Does that make him a journalist now? 

I guess I maybe feel differently than everyone else. But I feel like with how unreliable some outlets of media are today, its better to trust reliable sources with reliable journalists rather than just random people with opinions and facts. A journalist's job is to report information. Excuse me if I decide not to listen to you if you don't have a reputable past and organization with work experience behind you. 

-kim

Loyalty and Journalism

You'd think this would be a no brainer type of question, the fact of whether or not journalists should be loyal to their employer, or to their audience. Here's the thing. I thought it was a no brainer type of question, until our class discussion. I'm still split on my decision, although learning more in a certain direction. See if you can tell as I describe the pros and cons.

Loyalty to an employer:

OK. I totally understand why this is absolutely essential. If your boss tells you to write a story, or say a certain thing and you don't say it, guess what. You've lost your job. There are plenty of struggling journalists in today's society that you are easily replaceable. I hate hearing that. But really, to think you're easily replaceable? I will always try my best to make sure I am someone who is NOT easily replaceable for this reason.

Here's the question though. Is writing or saying something because your job is on the line...ethical? To lie, or fabricate something so that you don't lose your job? The principle of Utilitarianism comes into play here. Tough one huh?

Pros: You'll have a boss that loves you if you decide to do what they say. You won't have to worry about walking into work and being on edge about a story if its exactly what they wanted. You might even get that big bonus, or promotion. Chances are too that you'll be the employee they choose to rely on; to give the big projects to.

Cons: You'll have to live with the guilt of posting false information. You'll be lying to America, not just yourself. Chances are, you'll get caught. Your employer will do one of two things: back you up, or rat you out and fire you. If they told you to do the piece, I'd hope they would stay loyal to you like you did to them and have your back through the turmoil of having America find out that not all of the facts posted were exactly true.

A student in our class made up a good point. Here's his blog. His big phrase was "Don't bite the hand that feeds you". Its true. You shouldn't. But when is enough, enough, you know? 

Loyalty to the public:

It's best to make the people who help contribute to your pay roll happy. Hence the above post about being loyal to an employer. But, guess who pays your employer? Your audience! If you make them unhappy, they will stop reading, and your audience will slowly dwindle, along with your company's income. Lets say that you find out some dirt on a big issue, something that might make your company look bad as well. What do you do? Do you choose to tell the truth to your readers, and put your company in the bad light? Or do you lie or twist the information so the public is only getting half of the truth? Is THAT ethical? I like what Mark Doremus has to say here. It's not such a clean cut answer.

Pros: People see journalists as a source of information. That's our job, to inform the public. If you make them happy, you're on the right track. People will trust what you have to say, and once that trust is gained, you have a set of faithful readers. You'll have the respect of the public for doing the right thing by informing them of all of the facts, not just what an employer thinks should be told.

Cons: Once you decide to tell the whole truth, there is no taking it back. An employer can fire you just like that, and you're out on the streets without a home and support for your family. Most businesses are unlikely to hire you for remaining unloyal to your company, and you're left to sit at home and hope your blog makes it big.

So what's a journalist to do?

It's a tough one. In chapter three of our book, it states that a journalist's first loyalty should be to the public. I'm going to have to agree. If I were to ever be put in a tough situation like that, I'd have to go with the principle of Utilitarianism again and help the greater number of people. Plus, I'd never want a guilty conscience. After all, its just a job. I'd prefer to keep my integrity instead.

Example:

Look at Marc Stein's article about Jerry Sloan's resignation. Deron Williams called him out on how he fabricated his entire story of what happened, all so he could get a story. This is exactly what I don't want to be as a reporter. ESPN obviously supports Stein. He's one of their biggest sports reporters. However, how he goes about getting his stories makes me sick. He twists information to get readers to follow him. He has a reputation for being an unreliable source. He stays loyal to his company--and is doing just fine. People still read his stuff. He still has a job. But for me, I'd rather have my audience trust me. I'd rather not have the people I write about say that I lie. I want to keep good sources, not destroy them. But that's just me. I'd rather have my integrity, rather than a good story and a high paying job. Just saying.

-kim

Truth and Journalism

Its funny how people can lie every day about big things or little things. People forgive each other and move on, or they somehow escape being caught in their little white lie. Being a journalist gives you no such luxury. When a journalist lies, they are always caught eventually; and when that day comes is the day they are no longer a credible journalist or source.

While reporting this week, I was at the media day for the BYU Basketball team. Numerous reporters were surrounding Jimmer Fredette and asking question after question. It was brought up that someone had made a Twitter account under his name. When asked if it was true, he laughed and replied with a big NO, and continued to state he didn't think he would be getting one for awhile.

As I watched the news on Fox 13 that night, I saw the story preview on the basketball team that one of the reporters there had put together. The reporter's commercial tease said, "And I'll tell you more about Jimmer's new Twitter account after the break". Curious, I stayed tune to hear just what this reporter had to say, as I had flat out heard Jimmer's answers to the question.

In the reporter's story, he brought up the fact famous names like John Wall and Nelly had Tweeted about Jimmer. And then guess what he did. He preceeded to tell his audience how Jimmer got a Twitter account that same night! And that it was really his! If I hadn't have been present for his interview, I might have trusted this guy. After all, I watch Fox 13 every once and awhile and had always found them to be a credible source. After watching that story air, I will never believe a word of what that reporter says. Ever. It also makes me less likely to watch Fox 13, considering the fact that they let him say that on air and didn't check his facts!

When I went to find the link to the story online, it had been taken down. A shortened version has been left in its place. You can watch that here. My guess is they had one to many people comment on it (I sent an email to them. I was quite angry). You can read down in his story below the clip about the Twitter comments from John Wall. As a watcher of Fox 13, and an upcoming journalist, I am still angry about this. Especially that they took it all down and never made an apology for the inaccuracies.

This brings up the topic of truth and journalism. This personal experience helped me realize the severity of one little white lie to make a story sound good. I never want to watch another story from that reporter again.

What is truth?

I loved the quote from the book that says, "And, as we will see, 'journalistic truth' is more than mere accuracy. Its a sorting out process that takes place between the initial story and the interaction among the public, newsmakers, and journalists...(it) is ultimately what sets journalism apart from all other forms of communication"(Kovach and Rosenstiel, 41)

Journalism in that definition then, is not just about reporting truth, but sorting out the truth and reporting the key points throughout the whole information gathering process. For me, that is the hard part about journalism. I have a hard time deciding what to report and choosing the most important pieces of information. 

Apparently, members of our class aren't the only ones researching this question. I came upon this blog.

He asks the same question, what happened to truth in journalism. It brings up a good point, that people more and more are choosing not to trust media sources. In this day and age its important to be able to be a reliable source. Its a good post. Read it. 

When I looked up the definition for truth it states, " A fact that has been verified". Thats our job. To verify and report facts. 

Most importantly though, I reel back to our class discussion. We couldn't come up with one definition of truth. With our activity, every group had part of the truth, and reported it. But the facts lead up to being unless you had all of the information, you didn't know the real outcome of the situation. I think thats how our world is. Things are constantly changing and being uncovered. We are supposed to report facts as we know them, and as fast and accurately as we can. When we cover a story, we should stick with it until the end so all of the truth is then revealed. 

I liked our class discussion and how not everyone had the same definition of truth and journalism. I think that shows how the world really is, and how it always will be. Thats life. Thats journalism. 

-Kim