To be a good journalist, you have to build trust with the editor of a news organization, the colleagues and most importantly, the readers. Stephen Glass was an intern at the New Republic, where he was well-liked for his personality and his ability to write amazing, compelling news stories week after week. Now, Glass is well known for two ethical issues: the deception of the readers and the colleagues who trusted him at the New Republic.
Glass got away with writing stories that were fake from the first to the last word. However, some of his stories had only made up characters or quotes. It took a long time for Glass to admit to his faults and give an apology, which did not quite heal all the scars he may have left behind on readers or colleagues. Glass went as far as creating fake websites, fake business cards and fake events. He worked harder to come up with the fabricated stories but he could have put that effort into finding real ones.
The fabricated stories have caused quite a struggle for Glass to be able to regain trust from his readers, and may never be a journalist again. His actions could have ruined the reputation of the New Republic and other news organizations who published his articles. These organizations hire professionals to fact check the stories that are written but Glass was able to fool even those experts.
______________________________________________________________
There was something about showing up to the newsroom and presenting an exciting news story that gave Stephen Glass intense pleasure. This personality makes David Plotz, an American journalist, believe that Glass is a fabulist rather than a plagiarizer. “Fabulists can’t find anything in the real world that equals their imagination,” Plotz said. “That’s why they make things up, because what they invent is more interesting than what they see around them.” Which could very possibly be the case because he had an addiction to the praise people gave him.
Other specialists say the pressure that was put on Glass pushed him to be unethical in his actions. In the Canadian Journal of Communication it is explained that Glass “failed” to know that his stories went completely against the “primary value” of being a journalist, “a commitment to truth as a primary value.” Glass was more focused on the thrill and became a perfect example of the unethical values of journalists.
Then there is David Callahan, who said this country has come to make people think cheating is not a sin. If the outcome of cheating involves money or career, then even “normal morality may prevail in private life.” So, now some believe that everyone is sinning for the big American dream and that gives them the right to sin as well.
When facing these challenges people should look at Aristotle’s ethical principle known as the golden mean and its 4 cardinal virtues. Though ethical decisions are not a situation that can be measured on this scale, Glass’s case is a good example of the “excess” extreme, rather than the “deficit” extreme.
First, the cardinal value “temperance” is knowing moderation, while the “excess” extreme is someone who is sinful. This is where Glass should have had some truth in the stories that he fully made up. Another cardinal value, “justice”, has an “excess” extreme of selfishness or “deficit” extreme of indifference, which is another representation of Glass being at the “excess”. He did not care that he has deceived the readers and his colleagues, but saw it as an opportunity. Another representation of Glass at the “excess” extreme would be the cardinal value, “prudence”, which makes him corrupted by pleasure. If he had gone just through these 3 of the 4 cardinal values, then maybe he would have noticed how unethical his actions were.
______________________________________________________________
As Glass is trying to move on from his past, it seems to be inescapable as it follows him everywhere he goes. Even though he has graduated from Georgetown Law school, there were still traces of fabrication in old stories. This stopped him from being able to actually practice law at many firms. Once you have lost trust, it is just about impossible to regain it. So, Glass will never be a journalist again and there is nothing he can do about it now. If I was in charge of hiring journalists at a news organization, Glass, or anyone with an unethical background, would not be hired. The second chance that they get would only show future journalists that you can still survive in the world of journalists even if you’ve plagiarized a few times.
Basically, if you want to be a good journalist, then you should learn from Glass and just never plagiarize or deceive anyone. The only solution for Glass is to enter another field, maybe a job in which lying and deceiving would work in his favor. Second chances are something that everyone deserves in theory, but in this case Stephen Glass did not seem sincere about his actions as he continued to try to cover his tracks after getting caught. This aspect of his character shows his true colors and emphasize the idea that journalism is just not the right career for Glass.
Samson, A. (2005). 4. Plagiarism and fabulism: Dishonesty in the newsroom. Pacific Journalism Review, 11(2), 84-100.
Shapiro, I. (2006). Why They Lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating. Canadian Journal Of Communication, 31(1), 261-266.