Rehman, Anil, Emilia & Mariam:
Your task is to take the ethics scenarios we worked on as a class this morning. Select one that was not discussed as a class. List your considerations as a list of questions. Beneath your list of considerations, spend a paragraph or two talking about what action you would take.
Your deadline: Friday by 5 p.m.
I have chosen the 10th ethics scenario about NATO military troops:
ReplyDeleteHow can I inform my readers in a better way about national security problems and military decisions?
Would population be interested in such a subject? Will this subject catch reader’s ¬attention?
Is my question threatening to the military security of my country? Is that a sensitive subject or the top general is trying to avoid some particular questions?
Should all citizens be informed about where is their money going from the budget?
What can be the position of the population regarding this matter?
Should their opinion be taken in consideration?
Should the public opinion and the civil society be informed and consulted on such an issue?
What will be the implication of this act on our foreign affairs, external relations with that country and financial matters which should be supported through national budget?
Are opinions of mass- media and the position of journalist about this important in this context?
Taking in consideration the risks of such action, could be a journalist considered not patriotic?
Discussing with your own people and journalists about national military actions could not be a one good solution on finding which it the best one?
What action I would take:
From my point of view I would ask that question because this is the role of a journalist to put interesting and practical questions, to make research, to find for his own readers new clues and ways of finding the truth, to inform people and to know which are all aspects of one action if it is involving national matter and national money. I think the journalist should explain in short terms his desire to know more about that matter and to explain that he is speaking not just for him, but being a journalist is the voice of a part of population. Asking from on objective aspect of problem about national security problems it is an opportunity to make research in the live and could find more inform direct from the source not mediated by spokesperson. Also is a way of finding how national bodies and represents treat his journalist and how they respect theirs contributors. Maybe I should reformulate my question and its tone to seems to be more friendly and to be clear that is a question which could help people to understand better the top general strategy and how he intends to protect our national image and our foreign relations. Also it is a way of showing that mass media also concerns about military decisions and maybe an ally for expressing top generals’ military decision and make them are accessible to the population.
8.Story : Someone in office who is running for re-election his rival, and his spokesperson came up to me with a rumor just one week before the election about his rival being involved in a corruption. Now I'm confused because this politician whose spokesperson came to me will most probably win the election. Also, I feel under pressure because she slightly threatened me to publish this news as a rumor before she is giving the necessary proofs to me.
ReplyDeleteConsiderations:
1) Why the spokesperson of the politician in office who is most probably win the re-election in a week, does need to campaign so aggressively against the politician's rival?
2)Does the spokesperson lie or does she really have proofs to share with you about the rival's involving corruption?
3)Should I risk my credibility by publishing the news as a rumor before being sure? Should I consider my short term interest or long term ideals?
4) Can I reach some other sources about this issue?
5)Should I be pragmatic because of the hidden threat the spokesperson implied to me? If I refuse to publish it as a rumor before seeing proofs, how will my career may be affected?
6)What will be my real motivation if I choose to publish this news? Am I publishing it because I think it might affect public interest or because I'm scared?
What would I do?
I chose this story because the dynamics and ethical elements in the story were quite strong for me. Also I am at some extent familiar with such stories. If I were the journalist, I would not write the story before getting the proofs. However I would seek the middle way, because at the same time I am living in a real world would not want to loose one of my resources and access. I would rather seek another sources of information instead of trusting the spokesperson. Trying to get some more time for the proofs if they ever exist, would be also useful for me. (so, I would negotiate). On the other side, I would have some considerations on public interest as well of course but the main point is it won't have any direct impact on election process for the short term because the other side has already had the advantage. Basically what I would do will be waiting and making the necessary researches and not risk my credibility as my long term investment by covering news as rumors' and try to find some points that we can reach a consensus with spokesperson. As lastly, I would try to get the main and real motivation of the spokesperson because this side smells as well I think. So, I would have some chance to see the big picture and do not let any authority threat me with my career. To sum up, by not covering this news without necessary proofs, I would not become a "Don Quixote", but do something for my future and invest my credibility and. conscience.
Anil
I have chosen story number 4 that is about the Editor/ Photographer/ Reporter accepting the gift of mobile phone from a company president.
ReplyDeleteConsiderations:
1. The story is essentially an age-old conflict between theory of journalism and the way it is being practiced. The story places any editor/photographer/ journalist of the website in a confusing situation. Why? We need to remember the context that it’s a small website with little readership. Now the largest phone company is offering top of the line phones for your business. Some might say, its just the phones, so what big deal? We also might have run into some problems with the finances or it might just be the case that we loved those phones (actually I do) but that’s not my point here. Although the company President is saying that he does not expect anything but any editor would know that it’s more than just the phones being offered. Above all, any editor/reporter will be concerned a lot about the contact that he/she might lose by refusing it.
2. In some places, such gifts are a part of journalistic norms. They are not considered bad for networking. There can be a conflict with those norms -that is usually being followed since “all the media in the city is corrupt-and journalistic integrity.
Choice:
Although the situation places any editor in a situation where he has this choice to make between usual norms and losing an important contact. There is an assurance from the President of that company of wanting nothing in return but one would know that it’s not about it (that’s the way how things work). Here, context makes the choice easier for me. We need to remember that we have a perception about the rest of media to be corrupt. As an editor in this situation, I would politely thank the President (at the risk of losing a contact… sadly as a reporter I know that’s true!) and NOT accept the gift. We would have been in a different position if the decision were to go by the norms. In fact, there was no need to establish that website. If it comes to my choice, considering the context, I will choose ethics and theory in this case.
Yes professor Kelly, we have actually listened to you in that ethics class!