Bill Marimow’s talk at the Oweida Lecture Tuesday night was insightful and filled with practical applications of ethics. It was very interesting to hear a seasoned journalist speak about tough decisions he’s made in the field and his case studies emphasized much of the lessons we’ve learned from class. His career at The Philadelphia Inquirer and the Baltimore Sun led him to many ethical dilemmas and hearing his thought process in handling those cases was very beneficial to our studies of ethics.
The case studies that stood out most dealt with the handling of a gift and the naming of a kidnapped child who was possibly sexually assaulted. At the beginning of his talk, Marimow stated that his cardinal rule was to consult a senior editor whenever a situation caused him any uneasiness. He stuck to this rule as he faced many difficult ethical decisions. When he was offered baseball tickets from an official of an administration he had covered for a long time, he sought advise from a senior editor. Different news companies handle certain situations differently. At The New York Times their policy is that “staff members and those on assignment for us may not accept anything that could be construed as a payment for favorable coverage or for avoiding unfavorable coverage. They may not accept gifts, tickets, discounts, reimbursements or other benefits from individuals or organizations covered (or likely to be covered) by their newsroom. Gifts should be returned with a polite explanation; perishable gifts may instead be given to charity, also with a note to the donor. In either case the objective of the note is, in all politeness, to discourage future gifts.” (New York Times, 2005) This is a very rules-based policy and different from the company Marimow was reporting for. Together with his editors, they hammered out a way to deal with the situation without being disrespectful to the official or unethical to the community. Marimow accepted the invite to the game but covered the cost of the ticket through other purchases for the official once at the ballpark. This was also an example of ends-based decision making. Though the rules may have stated that gifts were not to be accepted, the practical benefit of going to a game so as to not offend a source outweighed the possible fallout of declining. In this case, the ends justified the means.
Another interesting case study that Marimow talked about involved kidnapped five-year-old girl. After an Amber Alert was put, out the child was found the next day with suspicions of having been sexually assaulted. Marimow was faced with the decision of whether or not to name the child. The company had a policy of naming victims and following that policy Marimow initially decided to print the child’s name. In this case Marimow did not feel comfortable with his decision and sought further advice before changing his decision and withholding the child’s name. He followed his cardinal rule to always seek extra advice when a situation made him uneasy.
Above all, the lesson that can be taken away from this lecture is that empathy will lead you in the right direction when dealing with ethical questions. The best way to know what to do is to understand the thoughts and feelings of the person you are reporting about.
Reference:
The New York Times Company. (2005). The New York Times Company Policy on Ethics in Journalism.