The Whole Truth and Nothing but the Truth

Journalists have a responsibility to tell the truth in their stories. Ethical problems arise in this when varying versions of the truth exist. Journalists are faced with questions like is it necessary to tell both sides? Is one side more credible? What is my responsibility to the audience? What is legal? What is ethical?

There is a lot to take into account when writing a story and trying to get all the facts. I believe, if it is true and relevant to the story, it should be in the story. Gordon says this is a time when not to publish every aspect of the truth. He gives a real life example a politician who is running for office and something embarrassing happened to him, there is no need to publish it if it has no connectivity to the rest of the story, even if it is true. 

I believe our responsibility as journalists to the audience has a big impact on what to and what to not publish. We know that the audience expects the truth and all the facts of a story, so we try to deliver that. This can make for a lot of work trying to find the facts digging through the two sides of the story. But it is what the audience expects us to do, and is our duty as journalists to tell the truth. 

There are also legal issues that can dictate what we publish. Journalists do not want to publish a false statement, so they do research to make sure they have the truth. This is a good way to keep journalists in check. But it can create fear in a journalist thinking that they will be sued for every little wrong sentence they write, so they just avoid writing those sentences or doing the research. 

It is important to inform citizens about what is going on around them, and journalists have their duty to dig deep and find all the relevant and credible facts. This website contains a definition about libel from the standpoint of the media. It is a good idea for journalists to know what consists of libel so they do not get sued. 

http://usinfo.state.gov/products/pubs/press/press08.htm