Codes of Ethics

There are many code of ethics these days. Not only in media professions, but also in many companies. I think it is a good idea to have these codes of ethics. Sometimes people get into some sticky situations and it is nice to have reference, like a code of ethics to look at in those times. I believe these codes should be more like guidelines, and do not need to be taken to the extreme in making sure people follow them. For journalists, in particular, a lot of the codes are common sense. They just reiterate what journalists already know. Like we have a responsibility to report the news, well yes we do because that is our job. They also say things like tell the truth, well we have a responsibility to do that, we do not necessarily need a code of ethics to tell us that. But in case you find yourself in a sticky situation, it is nice to have a code to fall back on. 

Codes of ethics for journalists started in the early 1900's. But they became much more specific in the 1970's. There are separate codes for different types of journalists. For example there is a print code, radio code and TV code. But there are also all encompassing codes that cover all the bases. 

One question we have to ask about these codes is who makes them? Who has the authority and the morals to write a code that everyone is supposed to follow? Well codes were first made because media organizations were afraid that if they did not make the code, the government would. But more often than not, it is a group of professionals who get together to make a code. This is the best way to do it in my opinion. To gather people who have worked in the field and been in some ethically straining positions would be the best people to write a code. The Society of Professional Journalists is a good example of a group of professionals getting together to make their code. Their code can be found at: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp

Origin of Ethics

Chapter two of Controversies in Media Ethics by Gordon and Kittross discusses the origin of ethics. It discusses mostly ethics on the individual level in media. Since I am a journalism student I will focus on how the journalists develop their ethical values and what influences the decisions they make. First we will start with how journalists and more broadly people in general develop their ethics. Fred Endres did a study in 1985 with newspaper journalists. In his study, Endres found that parents and early home life was the biggest influence on their ethics. The next biggest influence was experience. I think that these are two things that have had an influence on me as well and can see how they would affect journalists. I would say that my upbringing has a big influence on me more so than my experience since I am relatively inexperienced.

            Weaver and Wilhoit did two studies of media professionals to get an idea of their ethics. They came up with the typical journalist: “A married white protestant male in his mid thirties with a bachelor’s degree from a public university with 12 years of experience.” This typical journalist had some of the same values that shaped his ethics as discovered by Endres. One main thing that Weaver and Wilhoit found was that this typical journalist believes he has to tell the citizens about the activity of the government and other public service aspects of the job. This can pose a problem to the ethics of a journalist. If they feel so strongly to serve the public they want to tell the public, but by doing so they may put the public at risk. For example when there was the sniper in Maryland the police kept saying that the shooters were in a white box truck, but journalists knew the police were not looking for a white box truck. The journalists printed what the police told them to help their investigation, but this did not serve the public any good. This is an ethics standpoint that they developed. Perhaps from their experience or maybe from even earlier in their childhood. Ethics are very interesting and impossible to tell where they are truly inherited. I think it varies from person to person. It is important to get a grasp of our roots and influences to really understand our ethics.

 

the following link has an essay that contains some of Weaver and Wilhoit’s material:

http://srreinardy.iweb.bsu.edu/beyondsatisfaction/litreview.html

Free Expression

This is a very big topic in any media category, so it is no wonder it is a topic in ethics. First of all should the government be able to put limits on the media's right to free press and speech? As written in Controversies in Media Ethics the government can set regulations when "publications are obscene or directly incite violence, or they clearly threat national security." Do these circumstances validate government interaction? I think it can be necessary, but I also think it is up to the journalist. A journalist should have the ethics to not print or say something thing that would put the nation in danger or incite violence. Sometimes though it is hard to tell how people will react. 

Ethically speaking the real question is, is it right for the government to impose these regulations? Is this really what a democracy, like what we have in the United States is about? Journalists should understand that with great power comes great responsibility. And know that their articles or broadcasts will have an effect on people, and they should be prepared to deal with negative reactions, or know what not to talk about in order to avoid these riots. But this raises another point. The media has a responsibility to the citizens to be watch dogs and report on the bad things that happen to inform the uninformed. So they should report the things that will make some people angry. But I don't think it is up to the government to decide what will make people angry. 

There have been many court cases concerning the first amendment and the media and there has been a lot of different decisions, there are cases about libel and lots of other issues that I will not delve into yet. But the fact that reporters have to work so hard to keep their first amendment rights seems a little out of control.  

Here are some cases that have to do with the first amendment: http://www.anarchytv.com/speech/cases.htm

My Ethics

Since I am studying ethics it is important to show what group I fall into. Understanding my ethics and morals will help me make decisions once I enter the working world, hopefully the right decisions. Everyone has some ethical standards and there are several categories that everyone falls into. Most often a person is in multiple categories. As stated in Controversies in Media Ethics there are three major categories of ethical behavior one fits into. First is the Deontological Theory. This is the duty based ethics. It has to do with following rules and principles. Second is the Teleological Theory. This is very consequence based. A person thinks about the consequences of their actions and decides if that action is ethical based on what the consequences might be. Lastly, is the Personal or Subjective Theory. A person's ethics in this theory are based off of highly personal moral factors like intuition, emotions, or religious ideas. 

As far as my ethics go, I fall into both the Deontological (duty based) and Teleological (consequence based) theories. For the most part I follow the Deontological ethics. As a journalist, or soon to be journalist, I think it is important to deliver the story as it is without opinions or biases. I feel that is my duty as a journalist. If I use a quote in a story it should be exactly what the person said, not something I made up. I feel like it is very important to show both sides of a story, that is just the job of a journalist. As far as the Teleological theory goes I do think about the effect my actions will have on others. I think before I act. If I don't show both sides of a story I may be looked down upon or fired. If I misquote a source, I might loose that source forever. 

This a glimpse into my ethics using the theories from Controversies in Media 

Ethics. I hope you can use this explanation to help you find what theory fits your ethics.

I believe there is a little if each theory in a person, but one that is more dominant.

This website from the university of Davidson has more information and more 

theories that may help you find your the theory behind your ethical behavior.

http://www.bio.davidson.edu/people/kabernd/Indep/carainbow/Theories.htm

Media Ethics

Throughout this semester I will be writing about chapters in the book Controversies in Media Ethics by A. David Gordon and John Michael Kittross. The first chapter is an overview about ethics and different theories that try to explain ethics in the media. The theory I have chosen to focus on for this blog entry is the Social Contract Theory. This theory links morality to the state or society. In this theory people are used as moral agents. They affect other people to decide what is moral or immoral, ethical or unethical. This is very imaginable in todays day and age when so many people are worried about what others might think, or are concerned about every little thing a person does. Sacramento State University gives a nice lay out of social contract theory at                                                   . 

This website helps enforce the idea that people are worried about what others will think. 

         Another aspect of social contract theory is the fact that people in media do what is deemed ethical because they have nothing to gain by breaking the rules. People rely on one another to follow the rules. This is what helps keed things in order. People are expected to make the ethical decision.

         I believe this is a very applicable theory because it holds true to what modern people believe in. There is a conscience in everyone telling them to do the right thing, and they are expected to follow that. In doing so they encourage others to do the same thing. And thus people act as moral agents, keeping each other in line. We as humans are social creatures, so it is natural for us to interact and make good decisions in the presence of others. This is run of the mill ethics. People always want to get ahead, but they can’t always do that by being unethical, so they are ethical. They follow the rules and that encourages everyone to follow the rules. 

Welcome

Hello All,

I am Chuck Keegs. I am a student at Missouri State University. I am making a blog for one of my classes. I will be writing about topics brought up in my Media Ethics Textbook: Controversies in Media Ethics by A. David Gordon and John Michael Kittross. I am a Junior majoring in Broadcast Journalism. If you have any job openings let me know. Thanks. Enjoy reading throughout the semester and perhaps beyond.