Ethical Dilemmas

Journalists face ethical dilemmas everyday. They have to provide the whole

news objectively in most cases and determine what to with hold in an

information hungry world. Other dilemmas include accepting gifts from

companies or people involved in issues being covered and anonymous

sources. Journalist struggle to maintain a stance of integrity because there

are no clear rules about what is allowed and what is forbidden. Anyone can

be a journalist. You do not need a college degree or even a high school

diploma. That being said with all the information that is already out there,

one would like to stand out by providing the most information and covering

the biggest stories.

In my Media Ethics class with Rosemary Armao publish was the key word. If

you have information publish it. In my opinion that is not always the right

thing to do. Journalism is a profession that relies on objectivity, truth,

respect, and integrity. For example, was it alright for Julian Assage to

publish documents that could or may have threatened the national security

of our nation? My answer is no. There are certain times when

information should be withheld for the safety of the public.

Ethical DilemmasThe objectives of journalism sometimes conflict with journalistic ethics. In

such cases, the individual journalist or organization must decide which

should be prioritized. Since the goal of journalism is to distribute

information, the ethical considerations of privacy and confidentiality restrict

the distribution of certain information, and many ethical issues in

journalism center on the tension between privacy and disclosure.

The Pentagon Papers

In the case of the Pentagon Papers, the dilemma was between exposing

massive political deceit and protecting the secrecy of classified documents.

The documents in question detailed the history of the Vietnam War,

including descriptions of internal policies and military actions that had been

kept from the public. The papers revealed that the Kennedy Administration

had planned to overthrow South Vietnamese leader Ngo Dinh Diem, despite

professing surprise at his death in a coup. They also revealed that the

attitude of the Johnson Administration towards the escalation of the war,

the use of ground troops, and the purpose of the war was almost

diametrically opposed to what Johnson claimed publicly. In 1964, Johnson

claimed that he would not send American troops to fight on the ground, and

maintained that the purpose of the war was to secure an “independent, non-

Communist South Vietnam.” The Pentagon papers revealed that the

administration denied any change in military policy even after ground

operations began and that Assistant Secretary of Defense John McNaughton

prioritized preventing “a humiliating US defeat” over preventing the spread

of communism or acting in the best interests of South Vietnam.

Both the New York Times and the Washington Post gained access to the

papers through military analyst Daniel Ellsberg, publishing excerpts and

analyses in 1971. The Nixon Administration obtained an injunction to stop

publication of the papers and charged Ellsberg under the Espionage Act of

1917, arguing that publication of the papers interfered with military

operations. The charges were dismissed in court, creating a precedent for

greater journalistic freedom where classified documents are concerned.

Confidentiality and Justice

Journalists often face more mundane decisions between protecting

confidentiality and exposing important information. This is especially

common when interviewing sources who confess crimes to the interviewer

after being promised confidentiality. Often the decision to protect or expose

the source comes down to the perceived seriousness of the crime. Nick

Martin-Clark, a freelance journalist in Northern Ireland, developed a

rapport with a loyalist prisoner who confessed a murder to Martin-Clark

after being promised confidentiality. Martin-Clark published the confession

in the Sunday Times and testified in the resulting trial. He believed that his

duty to uphold the public good trumped the promise of confidentiality in this

case. In his own words,

[D]espite the difficulty of going against a source, this was a promise I

eventually felt, after some agonizing, that I could not keep. [. . .] There was

a clear public interest in solving a murder [. . .] [S]omeone who might well

have killed again will now almost certainly never have the chance to do so.

(2003)

There was a considerable backlash in the journalistic community against

Martin-Clark’s decision to betray his source. John Coulter of the Irish Daily

Star argued, “the fundamental ethical principle of journalism is that we

have a moral imperative to give a guarantee of anonymity to genuine

confidential sources providing bona fide information.” (2005) However, as

journalist and academic Michael Foley pointed out, determining the veracity

of an anonymous source is often difficult, and perhaps journalists should

adopt a general policy of using anonymous sources as sparingly as possible.

He suggests that journalists ask themselves, “Are my actions or decisions

likely to increase the trust between me and my readers, viewers, or

listeners?” (2004, “Absolutism and the Confidential Controversy”) Views

from all points on the spectrum from confidentiality as an absolute duty to a

strictly utilitarian viewpoint abound, highlighting the ambiguity of this type

of ethical dilemma.

Unavoidable Ethical Dilemmas for Digital JournalistsNewsgathering1) Accuracy can become a casualty in the competition and hurry native to the 24/7 digital news environment. What systems should be in place to protect fact-checking? What factors should give priority to publication, vs. verification? Should news organizations alert users to trustworthiness of either information or sources? 

2) Online, errors can live on forever.  At the same time, misstatements can easily be erased from scrutiny. What is a news outlet's responsibility to track down errors that have spread through social media, and to highlight corrections? 

3) What is the responsibility of a news organization to fact-check community-based reporting when a community member may be promoting one perspective or simply lack the training to sort fact from fiction? If such reporters have conflicts of interest—clear political agendas or financial interests, for example—is it enough to identify these? Should community contributors be held to the same ethical standards as staff journalists?

Accountability/Transparency1) When is it appropriate for journalists not to publish information, even when it might already be publicly available or improve site metrics? (For example, mug shots from traffic violations, teacher names paired with their students’ test scores, DUI citations of non-public figures.)  

2) Social media companies are promoting "frictionless sharing" and the linkage of personal information across the Web. What is journalism's responsibility to privacy? Should news organizations set a limit to user information sharing either internally or externally, even when it might help build advertising or audience? 

3) How should news organizations handle user information collected via user registration, Facebook pages, Google+, location-based social media and subscriptions? Should the editorial/business divide be maintained when it comes to social media? How transparent must a news organization be about its use of reader data?

4) How can journalists who use social media to promote their stories and build a following protect against perceptions of bias or influence peddling?

Metrics

1) Pressure has increased to bridge the business/editorial divide. Should newsroom staff be protected from or participate in decisions about handling sponsors or targeting specific audiences?

2) Metrics provide valuable insight into user habits and trends. But how much should metrics drive publishing decisions? Should news organizations focus on the most popular topics and lessen emphasis on longer, more complicated stories that may not draw audience?  

3) Should metrics influence reporting and writing decisions? Should journalists be protected from story metrics or should they be trained how to use them to strengthen reporting and writing practices?

Inclusion/Free-Flow of Information1) What is the responsibility of journalists to actively break down the silos of perspective, information, and ideological frames that populate the Internet?  

2) What is the responsibility of journalists or news sites to actively integrate the demographic niches (race, class, gender, generation and geography) that can characterize news sites, blogs and other digital media? 

Potential solutionsTechnological Strategies

Include a correction button with every story allowing readers to alert reporters and editors to

inaccuracies.  Make corrections policy clear to users.

Create a permanent URL for a story and update the piece there; allow the story history (and errors)

to be visible to users.

Assign story elements (data, photographs, video, quotes) a unique identifier so that when it is used

elsewhere, readers will be able to see its provenance and original context.

Create a "story bank" of orphan content with low initial readership that might attract new or niche

audiences elsewhere. (Match.com for news content.)

Develop a checklist in the CMS for cross-checking content across multiple platforms:  Did you check

the spelling of every name?  How many sources did you include? Were diverse sources consulted?

Make annotation and footnotes (such as those used in fact-checking) visible to users.

Create an award for apps and other technologies that support accuracy, inclusivity, and other core

journalism values.

Develop technology that can surface a mix of perspectives and link demographic silos.

Develop metrics that reach beyond measuring clicks in order to align with the journalistic mission

and possibly enhance revenue potential.

Show source of grant- or fellowship-funded journalism using taglines or other means.

Human Strategies

Update corrections policies and create a corrections/revisions work flow.

Create systems that reward accuracy over speed, and encourage traditional journalism awards to do

the same.

Create a set of codes and principles for community-based journalists.

Offer brown bag sessions around ethics case studies, including some cases that highlight differing

business and editorial values. Invite everyone in the organization, includingsales and programmers.

Integrate ethics into the organization culture.  Develop a set of shared values central to the

journalism mission that support credibility and thus contribute to revenue and sustainability.

Develop a niche and movement for “slow journalism.”

Recruit a diverse staff across all levels and specialties.

Create project teams across business, technology and editorial departments.

Develop campaign(s) to market the importance of journalism's commitment to ethics, investigation,

and credibility to the public.

Train everyone in metrics and how to use them to serve values-based storytelling.

Define transparency for the organization so that people from different backgrounds (eg business

and journalism) will have a shared understanding of what this means.

Urge funders to use diversity among staff and founders as a metric for grants.

Educational Strategies

Avoid focusing too much on specific technologies because of the speed of change. Provide

opportunities for students to develop comfort with different platforms and train them to be

adaptable.

Teach students how to collaborate with technologists and entrepreneurs.

Make sure the basics aren't lost: critical thinking, hard questions, source development, good

storytelling, and basic grammar.

Teach media literacy to the general public and to students outside journalism.  Help them

appreciate the importance of civic participation.

Offer continuing education on metrics, platforms, etc.

0000000000face:

1. Conflict of interest: Examples include interviewing friends; only interviewing one grade or those with a specific point of view; "getting even" with those who might have wronged you; doing anything that might compromise objectivity in the reporting of the truth.

2. Plagiarism: Claiming others' work as one's own, essentially stealing from them. Students must credit other people's materials and ideas, including those published in newspapers, magazines and books. This includes "borrowing" or downloading visuals from the Internet to use without permission with stories.

3. Anonymous sources: Although many reporters use anonymous sources, there are rules about when to use them. A reporter has to determine the information's value and whether is it possible to get it any other way. She also has to determine whether she needs to protect the source from harm from being an identified source. A comment about the cafeteria's food should not be permitted to remain anonymous, for example, but a revelation about suffering child abuse may be.

4. Offending or distasteful content: Although it is impossible to run any story without offending, insulting or displeasing someone, student journalists must strive to keep the press open and accessible to a wide range of views without stooping to gratuitous offense. While some use of "dirty" language might be necessary, journalists have to decide if there is another way to present the

information or if the presentation will be so offensive it will preclude readers from getting the information.

5. Invasion of privacy: While this is often a legal issue, it is also an ethical one. Student - and professional - reporters must consider the consequences of publishing the outstanding news value photo or naming someone in an article.

6. Bias: Human beings cannot be purely objective. The mere selection of one story over another raises the issue of value judgments. Those who create content must attempt to be as fair and impartial as is possible. Every issue has more than one side, and all sides should be represented as much as possible. Student journalists trying to be objective should not avoid exploration, experimentation and variety in the press.

7. Commitment to accuracy: Little undermines integrity and, therefore, effectiveness of the media more than carelessness (or deceit) leading to inaccuracy in the press. Not publishing information is almost always better than publishing inaccurate information. The rush to be first, prized today and available to anyone now with the Internet, is no justification for not checking out data, information and sources.