The movie Shattered Glass is a very good resource for aspiring journalists of what not to do if you want to succeed in the profession. Although many themes are presented, the two issues that really spoke to me were fabrication and the act of lying. Stephen Glass fabricated more than two dozen of his stories for a dependable magazine in Washington D.C. (The New Republic). At its simplest of forms, the act of fabrication in this case could have single-handedly ruined the dependability of the magazine, among other consequences.
The second theme I highlighted, lying, was consistent through the entire story. It was hard to see when Stephen Glass had real emotions or real information. In my opinion, creating a whole story with a back-story is bad; really bad. Not to mention, making the story is a waste of time for the editor, the reader and even yourself. But what he did was so much worse. Glass lied about 27 stories and furthermore, so many lies were told to his colleagues.
I think Stephen Glass continued doing this for so long because the fictional stories were a fun read, he was allowed to get away with it and also because it gave him a popular name within his organization and probably among readers. In my honest opinion, I wonder if anyone at the New Republic overlooked that he had fabricated his stories just because they knew him on a personal level. I know that even for myself, if you think about it, it would be hard to turn a friend or do research to see if everything they were saying was indeed factual. His deceitfulness is a big deal because journalism already has bad stereotypes.
One article I read discussed the Disaster Incubation Theory which was a study of a British sociologist Barry Turner. It does not directly relate to journalism but can be connected to a newsroom. Under this theory, it argues that usually there are warning signs of deception in the newsroom that are overlooked for one reason or another (as I speculated above). It calls the time between the first warning sign and the final action taken by the organization the incubation period (Lasorsa, 2007). This is important because a lot of people turn their head to this or actually don’t see it. Truth be told, in my opinion, you should always be looking for these warning signs.
The article “Lying to Tell the Truth” really looks into the mental reasoning of a journalist as to why lies or deception is used. It mentioned that most people see others as more unethical then themselves, so that is one way they justify the deception. Sometimes they justify by talking through all of the things they did clearly right to balance out the wrongdoing (Seow, 2004). From this article, I learned what I think should be done. I think all journalists need to take a stand and see deception as always wrong. In some cases it’s harder to get the story without it, yes, but that is an instance where you should consult your peers or editor for help. At the very least, when it is used it should only be used as a last resort. You should never justify why you did it. In my opinion, you know you did something wrong, so you are trying to make yourself sound better by talking around it. Take responsibility for your actions. If you were deceitful as a last resort but it helped the greater good, know that some good came of it but don’t deny that you lied.
You are a journalist. Ultimately, your job is to inform the public about news that may affect them, not to make up the news to make it more interesting.
References:
Lasorsa, D. L., & Jia, D. (2007). NEWSROOM’S NORMAL ACCIDENT?. Journalism Practice, 1(2), 159-174. doi:10.1080/17512780701275473
Seow Ting, L. (2004). Lying to Tell the Truth: Journalists and the Social Context of Deception. Mass Communication & Society, 7(1), 97-120.