The Grand Finale: Analysis of classmates blog's

Media Ethics-Handling Secret Information

Friday, January 13, 2012

Julien

In this blog Julien presents a case study in Uganda that deals with the ethical dilemma of releasing secretive information. A newspaper in in Uganda was brought a photo of an unnamed source. The picture showed a young naked woman being pinned down by men in Ugandan army uniforms. The solders were shaving her genitals. The editor of the newspaper faced a tough decision on deciding on whether to publish the picture or not as the picture was pretty graphic. The editor ended up publishing the photo, with no story, on the back page of the newspaper. Strangely enough the editors were later charged by the state with sedition and publishing false news that could create fear and alarm.

So how do we decide if we should publish such information as in the case above? Julien suggests we should look at who will be impacted and how the information may be used by others, if published. He also presents ethical guidelines from Mills and Bok to help in the decision making process. I agree with Julien’s suggestions but I would like to present another framework that we talked about in my media ethics class.

The framework asks us to answer four questions:

·      Should you put the info out?

o   If is often said that information that wants to get out will get out. In the case above I do believe that the picture needed to get out to bring awareness.

·      Who gave you the source?

o   In this case the source was unnamed, I am sure for protection purposes, but I would say he was credible because Uganda has a history of soldier abuse towards women. We should always determine how credible a source is.

·      Will the info cause direct damage?

o   Usually if there is a doubt about damage then we should leave it to the authorities but in the case above I do not really see any direct damage, except to the armies image.

·      What are the consequences?

o   No one can reliably predict consequences. I think all you can do is weigh the outcomes. In the case above the editors believed that publishing the picture would bring awareness to the issue of abuse towards women.

Public Relations Redefined

Saturday, January 28, 2012

Ryan

In this blog Ryan says that the definition for public relations should have never been changed from the one created in 1978 at the worlds first assembly of public relations association. The definition they created defines public relations as the art and social science of analyzing trends, predicting their consequences, counseling organizational leaders, and implementing planned programs of action, which will serve both the organizations and the public interests. The current definition of PR is to manage the message an entity is sharing with its different audiences in order to help the organization and public adopt mutually to each other.

I agree with Ryan in that the definition probably should have never changed. The previous definition begins off by stating that PR is the art of analyzing trends, which is the most important part of the definition in my view. I believe this because society is always changing, mainly because of the rapid changes in technology. If we look at today’s society, almost everyone has the ability to create content on their own and information can be shared instantly. The current definition of PR does not really address societies ability to change as does the old definition.

In my blog I talked about some possible ethical implications and I think they also apply to the definition that Ryan presented. The ethical implications are:

·      Who is the PR firm responsible to? The organization? The public?

·      What guideline will be used to avoid conflicts of interest?

·      Will public relations firms alter societies content enough to hide truth and protect the organization?

AP News Values and Principles

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Miguel Anez

In this blog Miguel addresses intellectual property and freedom of information.  Miguel talks about the difficulty of establishing limits for intellectual property. The Society of Professional Journalists code of conduct states that an AP staffer who reports and writes a story must use original content, language and phrasing- plagiarizing is taking the work of others and passing it off as your own.

In terms of plagiarizing, AP professionals can find themselves in grey areas because it is common for them to use work from previous work passages in their own work and this presents an ethical dilemma on whether or not to use certain content.

To address this dilemma Miguel would use David Ross’s, Pluralistic Theory of value guideline, which argues that “there is often more than one ethical value simultaneously competing for your preeminence in our ethical decision making.”

I totally agree with Miguel’s choice to use this ethical framework. In our class discussions we have often concluded that ethics always depends on the situation. Different situations will call us to use different ethical values and cause us to evaluate different ethical perspectives. One situation may call you to evaluate the effect your choice will have on everyone while another situation may call you to do some self-evaluation.  An AP professional will have to take many ethical values into consideration when determining whether or not to use certain information in their works which someone else my have used previously.

Issues of Privacy & Ethics in the Age of the Internet

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Jon

In this blog Jon talks about the Megan Meier cyber bullying case. A news reporter had to make an ethical decision on whether or not to post the names of the neighbors of Megan Meier in an article addressing the case. Although many people believed the neighbor’s were responsible for Megan Meir’s death, they had done nothing against the law. In the American legal system you are innocent until proven guilty as Jon brings up in his article. Because there were no charges or any laws broken, the journalist decided no to post the names of neighbors who were involved in the cyber bullying of Megan Meir.

Jon believes the reporter used Bok’s ethical guideline in determining whether or not to post the names of the neighbors. One aspect of this ethical guideline states that we should consult our conscious when trying to make the right decisions. I stand with Jon in stating that the reporter made the right situation to withhold the names of the neighbors. The neighbors did not break any laws thus, there were no charges filed against them.

At the end of his blog, Jon states that social networking sites should not have an ethical obligation to intervene- I disagree with Jon here. I believe that something needs to be done on their part to prevent or deter cyber bullying in the future. In my blog I stated that social network users should be more aware of spotting cyber bullying and then intervene on peoples behalf.

After our last class discussion some important points were brought up about social networking sites and ways they can do more to prevent cyber bullying. Social networking sites have a feature on all pages that allows for reporting or flagging of anything that seems abusive or harmful. The problem is that we do not believe that people are aware of this feature. I think that social networking sites should make it mandatory for all users to go through some sort of presentation on how to use the reporting feature and how to identify abusive posts or behavior. II would probably me beneficial to have this presentation before signing up for the site. I think this can be helpful in preventing or deterring cyber bullying.

The Sun also Rises

Friday, February 3, 2012

Lucyslallations

In this blog the blogger addresses the Megan Meir case. The blogger brings up a good point in her blog which I have not seen in the other blogs I have read. She says that not only are ethics, privacy and secrecy dilemmas facing today’s journalists, but so is discretion. Bok defines discretion as the intuitive ability to discern what is and is not intrusive and injurious-in other words causing harm or having an adverse affect.

The discretion used by the journalist to withhold the neighbors names was important in maintaining societal structure. One thing I talked about in my blog is privacy and how it pertains to society. Privacy is an aspect of life that has to be respected as it enables a civilized society to some degree. If Polkin released the names of the neighbors in the early stages of the incident, imagine the possible reactions. People in society wanted the Meir’s neighbors dead. As angry as people were with this incident, we have to respect the order of society and Polkin’s choice did just that. His discretion potentially prevented “uncivilized behavior” against the neighbors (I do understand the anger of those of society but we do not want to send a message that it is ok for those of society to take matters into their own hands. The anger should be geared towards the legal system). I think his decision should be an example of respecting the order of society and it should also be an awakening for lawmakers, that things need to be changed.