In the Oweida lecture, Bill Marimow, discussed two ethical issues that stood out to me. Those were having children’s best interest when reporting a story in journalism. The other ethical issue was being objective and trying to be ethical in journalism. These issues are important because children should be protected in the media, and if they aren’t that means the journalist shouldn’t be trusted in anything else they do. And being objective shows you are thinking about whether something is ethical to do or not; which is a show of a good journalist.
Marimow brought up a case about a 10 year old, and whether he should give out the name of the boy when writing the story. He got permission from the child’s mother to use his name, but he felt she could have been intoxicated when she gave permission. He decided to only use Little Isaac’s name for the story instead of his full name because he didn’t believe it would have been ethical to do otherwise. I agree with that because the child still had to through all his years in school. If the story would have ran with his full name and people recognized him as the child from the story that can impact on the formation of his identity. That’s a risky thing to do to a young child by impacting them in such a way by linking them to a story involving drugs.
In, The Digital Reach of a Newspaper’s Code of Ethics, it brings up a story of a minor who stole his father’s police car and putting the ethics code in front of a journalist. It talks about the ethics in reporting; of seeking the truth and minimizing the harm that can result from it. I agree with that because a journalist’s job is to find truths and report on them. Society depends on their stories to know the current issues and what’s going on around them. But, if a journalist could impact someone negatively by their story, what measures should they take in order to decrease that risk and still put the truth out there? Should they choose not to give out the name of their source, withhold a certain picture, or omit parts of the story that could be bad for a certain individual? But, if they did that is that really reporting the truth, or lying in a certain way by not sharing certain facts? That’s where a journalist’s ethics come into play. If a minor is involved in the story somehow, I feel everything should be done to protect them and minimize any harm that could result from the story. Children are the new generation of our society and if they aren’t protected as much as possible in the media, then I feel that should be a violation of a journalist’s ethics.
In the second ethical issue it was brought up about whether Marimow should go to a baseball game with a member of the mayor’s administration. The reason this was an issue was because the paper Marimow worked out covered the major a lot, and if he might have a different perspective when writing about the administration because of spending time with a member of it. He said if you ever have to think if what you’re doing is ethical or not you should ask your editor. That shows you’re trying to do the right thing as a journalist and for the paper you work for.
In, A comparative analysis: Objective & public journalism techniques, it was said that objective reporting is possible if certain measures are taken. If objective reporting is properly followed then a bunch of different reporters should reach similar conclusions from a set of facts. I agree, because everyone will come up with their own conclusion to something since everyone thinks about things a little differently. However if you are completely objective, or at least as objective as possible, you should come up with a similar story as other reporters would if they reported the same thing. But if something or someone involved in the story is influencing you, your opinion can be biased, and you may not be reporting something as truthful as you would have wanted.
I believe both protecting children and being objective are good ethical values to have as a journalist, because it allows people to trust you and you’re able to report the news more accurately. If you feel you can’t be completely objective in something, then you shouldn’t cover the story. If a reporter feels a child could be harmed by their story they either shouldn’t run it, or shield the child’s identity in the story so they aren’t harmed.
Miller, D. (2006). The digital reach of a newspaper’s code of ethics. Nieman Reports, 60(4), 82-83. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/216752786?accountid=13158
R, L. H., & Stephen, J. Z. (2000). A comparative analysis: Objective & public journalism techniques. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(4), 50-67. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/200691108?accountid=13158