The
need for ethics in the media and in business springs from the need to minimize harm.
What kind of harm could the media do without
the constraint of ethics?
Embarrass
Without
the media’s ethical restraint in withholding identities of victims in
potentially embarrassing news stories, victims could suffer through more than
they already have.
In
November of 2011, the New York Times published a story that revealed
biographical information about an unidentified victim in the Jerry Sandusky sex
abuse scandal. The New York Times soon came under fire for allowing information
that could easily be searchable and inevitably lead to the identity of one of
Sandusky’s anonymous accusers. Although the intent of including the personal
information about the victim was to lend human interest to the story and
perhaps evoke sympathy, the details made the identity of the victim
discoverable.
Endanger
If the
media were not ethically bound to limiting information in some news stories,
people could potentially be hurt or even killed.
Imagine
if Woodward and Bernstein had been required to reveal the identity of Deep
Throat, their anonymous source for the Watergate expose. Deep Throat, whose real
name was eventually revealed, would have lost his job and might have even
faced physical threat. W. Mark Felt, a top official at the FBI, took a great
risk in divulging information about the Watergate scandal to reporters. At a
time of deep political corruption, the exposure of Felt as the primary source
would have lost him his job, reputation and possibly could have put him in
danger.
In a
Fox News broadcast in 2003, reporter Geraldo Rivera drew a map in the sand,
potentially exposing the position of U.S. troops in Iraq. Although it is
unknown whether or not the information compromised the safety of the soldiers,
a reporter must always think about the implications of the report. The safety
of the soldiers should have been considered in the delivery of the story, and
all war correspondents must protect the confidentiality of military secrets and
strategies to which they are privy.
Damage reputation
Once
something is said, there’s never a real way to take it back - just as once
something’s been done, it can’t be undone. People form impressions immediately
about what they see, hear and read. Even if an audience is alerted to an
information error, it’s unlikely that that first impression the misinformation
made in their psyche will go away. That’s just human nature and no one can help
it. The media have an ethical responsibility to report the truth and protect
the reputations of the innocent in stories.
In
1976, the National Inquirer ran a story about actress Carol Burnett. The story
made false claims that Burnett had been drunk and foolish at a restaurant in
Washington, D.C., and that she had gotten into an argument with Henry
Kissinger. Although the newspaper printed a retraction, Burnett felt that the
damage to her reputation had already been done. Burnett sued the newspaper and
eventually won, proving without a doubt that the information in the article was
false, and therefore libelous and defamatory.
Offend
The
media must consider whether or not to publish material that the public could
find offensive or inappropriate.
In
2008, Vanity Fair published an article about 15-year-old Disney sensation Miley
Cyrus. The photographs for the profile piece were taken by renowned photojournalist
Annie Leibovitz. One of the photographs sent the public, mostly parents of
children who were fans of Cyrus, into an uproar. The photo showed the underage
star holding a sheet over her breasts with her bare back exposed. Even though
the photo seemed innocent enough, the public found it to be sexual in nature
and therefore completely inappropriate for publication.
Shock
It is
the responsibility of the media to gauge whether or not shocking words or
images are important enough news to be shown in public.
In 1987,
Pennsylvania state treasurer Budd Dwyer, who had just been convicted of
bribery, held a press conference for what everyone expected to be his
resignation from office. After a long speech proclaiming his innocence and his
loss of faith in the American justice system, while cameras continued to roll
and snap, Dwyer pulled out a .357 Magnum revolver and shot himself in the head.
Although most publications chose not to run the gruesome photographs of the
suicide, some did. The story of a wrongly accused man and his tragic final
choice was soon overshadowed by the sensational circumstances of the act and
the gory images that were published.
What kind of harm could business do without
the constraint of ethics?
Manipulate
It is
the ethical responsibility of businesses to be transparent and honest.
Enron.
The executives at Enron wove a tangled web of financial deceit, cover-ups and
lies that cost investors billions of dollars. Executives falsely reported the
company’s earnings for years so that they could continue to bring in money from
investors who, in hindsight, knew nothing about the real financial situation of
the company. In the end, the Enron house of cards imploded, and the unchecked greed
of a handful of men cost billions of dollars and thousands of jobs.
Destroy
It is
unethical for businesses to take money for services not rendered and products
not delivered.
Bernie
Madoff made bold yet empty promises to investors all over the world about the
returns on their investments if they invested with his hedge fund, Ascot
Partners. Madoff’s hedge fund turned out to be one of the biggest scams of all
time. Tens of billions of dollars were lost and many investors’ lives were
destroyed following financial ruination. Madoff’s own son, Mark, hanged himself
in shame – another life destroyed by Madoff’s lies.
Why do we need ethics in media and business?
Through
these examples and many others not listed, it is clear that ethics are necessary
to protect. Without the protection that ethics provide, society would be
chaotic and harmful – to individuals, children and the general public. We must
protect each other so that we can all live in a just world of truth and
freedom.
Sources:
“Name
Withheld, but Not His Identity,” by Arthur S. Brisbane via The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/18/opinion/sunday/name-withheld-but-not-his-identity.html?pagewanted=all
“The
Secret Man,” by Bob Woodward
“A
NATION AT WAR: COVERAGE; Pentagon Says Geraldo Rivera Will Be Removed from Iraq,”
by David Carr via The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2003/04/01/us/a-nation-at-war-coverage-pentagon-says-geraldo-rivera-will-be-removed-from-iraq.html
“Photojournalism:
An Ethical Approach,” by Paul Lester. Retrieved from http://commfaculty.fullerton.edu/lester/writings/chapter4.html
“The
Final Speech of Bud Dwyer,” Video retrieved from http://vimeo.com/35481444
“Former
Pennsylvania Treasurer R. Budd Dwyer’s Controversial Death Re-examined in New
Film,” by David N. Dunkle via The Patriot-News. Retrieved from http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2010/11/former_pennsylvania_treasurer.html
“Writing
and Reporting News: A Coaching Method,” by Carole Rich
“Burnett
v. National Enquirer, Inc.,” Case 144 Cal.App.3d 991, 193 Cal.Rptr. 206.
Retrieved from http://www.lawlink.com/research/caselevel3/59876
“Miley
Knows Best,” by Bruce Handy via Vanity
Fair. Retrieved from http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/features/2008/06/miley200806
“Revealing
Photo Threatens a Major Disney Franchise,” by Brooks Barnes via The New York
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/28/business/media/28hannah.html?ref=annieleibovitz
“Miley
Cyrus Bare in Vanity Fair: Tells Fans She’s ‘Embarrassed’,” via the Huffington
Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/27/miley-cyrus-topless-in-va_n_98836.html
“How
Fastow Helped Enron Fall,” by Bill Saporito via Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,201871-1,00.html
“The
Enron Effect,” by Cathy Booth Thomas/Dallas via Time. Retrieved from http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1198917,00.html
“Enron
Scandal At-a-glance,” via BBC News, World Edition. Retrieved from http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/1780075.stm
“Bernie
Madoff’s $50 Billion Ponzi Scheme,” by Robert Lenzner via Forbes. Retrieved from http://www.forbes.com/2008/12/12/madoff-ponzi-hedge-pf-ii-in_rl_1212croesus_inl.html
“The
Lasting Shadow of Bernie Madoff,” by Diana B. Henriquez via The New York Times.
Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/11/business/bernie-madoffs-lasting-shadow-3-years-after-his-arrest.html?pagewanted=all
No comments:
Post a Comment