Ethics

I feel like everything about any kind of journalism has a major focus on ethics. Probably because following ethical standards can make or break your career. I think the Code of Ethics put out by the Society of Professional Journalists is probably good to keep in mind: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

A big issue in regards to ethics that I've found most interesting is how ethical something is even if it's not illegal. There's a big grey area there that is kind of for anyone to determine, but obviously people have their own opinions as to what's ethical and what's not. Clearly, anything that's illegal probably isn't the most ethical, for many reasons. The difficult part is determining what's ethical even if it's legal. There are plenty of bad things that people do that are legal, but are they right? When I ponder this question it makes me grateful to be a member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints because I was raised to have good standards an judgement that will prove to be helpful in a career of journalism. Having been taught to be honest and have integrity is something I knew would come in handy in life, so it makes sense how much it applies to the field of journalism.

I found this cool handbook online that has some good guidelines for good practices of ethics from NYU: http://journalism.nyu.edu/assets/PageSpecificFiles/Ethics/NYU-Journalism-Handbook-for-Students.pdf

A quote I like from this handbook is 
"The best defense against crossing ethical or legal lines is openness and honesty."
That's something I can definitely agree with. 

Private Government Papers Containing Vietnam Relations Information Leaked

The issue of the Pentagon Papers was a pretty interesting situation. This was a majorly significant moment for journalism. The fact that the New York Times published these secretive documents and that a former government official leaked them, was not good for the US government.
It would have been pretty crazy to see this headline back in 1971: http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB348/secret_briefs.htm

Our little class debate that we had on this subject was really interesting. I found myself not knowing where I stood anymore on the subject. I could definitely see how both sides of the argument had very valid points as to whether the papers being leaked was right or wrong and why. Obviously it's good and important for us as American citizens to know what's going on in our country and what our leaders are doing, but is ignorance bliss? I think it could go either way, depending on how much I felt like what was going on in Vietnam affected me. Coming from where I am now in 2013, I feel like I would have been ok not knowing what the Pentagon Papers contained. However, I can't help but think that I would feel differently if I was living through the Vietnam war. I might want to know more since it was more applicable then.
I liked this because it kind of talked about how some people felt at the time about the release: http://whitehousetapes.net/exhibit/first-domino-nixon-and-pentagon-papers

I think this is interesting in relation to ethics as well. Are there exceptions to what should and shouldn't be printed? It's a total judgement call, and everyone's opinions differ as to what's right or wrong to publish or write about. That's why as journalists we need to be independent thinkers, but at the same time use our own moral compass and good judgement.

Who Pays for Journalism?

In my Comms 101 class we recently discussed the same idea of who pays for journalism. The response of the class was pretty much unanimous: the majority believed that wealthy people pay for journalism (in the case of newspapers) because they have the money to spend on them and newspaper subscriptions cost money. I don't think that's necessarily always the case, and my doubts were confirmed in class last week when we talked about the same topic in Comms 239.

There was a lot of talk in class about how advertising pays for journalism, and I would have to agree with that. I feel like anytime I see any sort of journalism, whether it's print or online or the radio or television, there are all sorts of advertisements associated with it. Commercials on TV and radio, ads on the side of webpages, and ads in newspapers. They're everywhere.

Here's an interesting article I found about who pays for journalism. It's a viewpoint that addresses how it's paid for with paper journalism kind of falling out of the spotlight because there's more focus on non-print journalism with all the new technology that's taking center stage:  http://fair.org/extra-online-articles/who-pays-for-journalism-in-the-post-print-era/            

In the student presentation I enjoyed looking into how the matter of who's paid for journalism as changed over time and what it was like historically. Journalism didn't use to be such a business centered field, and I forget that a lot of times. Money wasn't always the main focus; the news was the priority. But of course, times have changed.

This was an interesting post I found that talks about how money affects journalism now: http://www.editorsweblog.org/2011/11/29/journalism-the-good-the-bad-and-the-money

What Journalists Owe Their Audiences

In my opinion, the thing that journalists owe their audiences the most is the truth. According to the student presentation, they are of the same opinion. And so are most journalists. I can see how this could sometimes be difficult for some professionals who might be desperate to get a story first or to make their news more enticing, which is why it is all the more important. With all the competition that surrounds journalism it is important to remember to have integrity in what you report. It is important in the long run especially because if you are dishonest, it will follow you and severely lower your credibility.

In relation, I liked learning about the distinction between reporting the truth and being balanced. It should be the goal of a journalist to report unbiased information and to keep it fairly balanced, however, if being balanced competes against telling the truth, the truth should take priority.

Although I see the truth as being one of the most important aspects of being a journalist, clearly they have other responsibilities to their audiences. These were also addressed in the student presentation. Being relatable to the audience is a big one. Who wants to read something they don't feel connected to in some way? How does it affect/ inform/ relate to me? They also need to be current and updated with modern times. If someone's reporting on old or outdated news, chances are that the audience will care less. Give us something that's "now."

I found a book online that delves further into what journalists owe their audiences and what their responsibilities are:
"The Ethical Journalist: Making Responsible Decisions in the Pursuit of News" by Gene Forman
I read bits and pieces of it online off of google books at http://books.google.com/books?id=JeygmPKvSoIC&pg=RA2-PT81&lpg=RA2-PT81&dq=what+journalists+owe+their+audiences&source=bl&ots=6ZeV0ZK0lN&sig=PxQ-ihU32CEfzyIMi7e5y0HDZb4&hl=en&sa=X&ei=Z1tUUsjZKeL2igKn0IC4Bg&ved=0CDIQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=what%20journalists%20owe%20their%20audiences&f=false

Check out Chapter 10. Good stuff.

There was a common theme in class Wednesday about the mind of a journalist. Hearing from Gareth Harding was very interesting because he was so real and honest with what he talked about. He talked about the benefits that come from taking risks and being independent and curious. Journalists need to have a particular mindset about them that help them get good work. One thing that I took in particular from his lecture was the importance of building your own brand. You need to have your own views as a journalist because you need to be able to think for yourself and plan out what you want to do. Connections are also very important, which reminded me that in everything I do I need to be eager to meet all kinds of people because you never know who can help you and in what ways in the future.

I looked Harding up and found his website, thought it was kind of cool: http://garethharding.com/

This tied in well with the theme of the student presentation. It was interesting to see everyones viewpoints on different topics or situations that were presented. It proved that journalists all have their different opinions, but they still need to be as unbiased as possible. You can choose who you work for based on what their viewpoints are and if you agree with them.

One of my favorite things that was brought up in the presentation was about what kinds of different audiences people write for and how they make changes on what they say based on what the audience knows. When I was in Jerusalem a big portion of our New Testament class focused on what groups each author of the gospels wrote for and how they altered their messages based on what the audience already knew, didn't know, cared about, or didn't care about. I was glad that was brought up in class, because it shows that the same stories or events can have skewed meanings or ways of being told based on the audience. No two people will write the same exact story. The mind of the individual journalist certainly adds and/or takes away from a piece of work.