Picture shattered glass; a mess of tons of tiny little pieces scattered across the ground. Stephen Glass, a reporter from the New Republic, had many aspects of his life scattered across the ground. Based on a master manipulator, Shattered Glass tells the story of Stephen Glass’s downward spiral in what some believed was his mastery. What Glass did master was the deception and deceit of a very large amount of people, from his closest peers to his widespread audience.
There are two main issues that arise from the situations that Glass brought upon himself: fabrication and deception. To talk about these things, we first need to define them. Deception is defined as “communicating messages meant to mislead others, meant to make them believe what we ourselves to not believe. We do so through gesture, through disguise, by means of action or inaction, even through silence” (Foreman, 2016). Fabrication is “making things up and passing them off as genuine” (2016). How did Glass commit these journalistic misconducts?
According to Jefferson Spurlock, Glass fabricated articles that ranged from Monica Lewinsky to George Bush, and as the movie displayed, internet hackers (2016). Shattered Glass tells the story of a hacker’s convention, a young Ian Restil, and a site called Jukt Micronics. No aspect of this event happened, and when individuals began to catch on to what was occurring, Glass just continued to lie.
Through his “gestures, disguises, and silence,” Stephen Glass betrayed those who trusted in him. In The Ethical Journalist: Making Responsible Decisions in the Digital Age, Foreman reiterates to his readers how important it is for journalists to gain their audience’s trust (2016). Think about your own relationships and how you would feel if you learned that most of the things they conveyed to you were a lie. Glass created fake phone numbers, contacts, and websites to make his stories sound legitimate. According to Lasorsa and Dai, co-authors of Newsroom’s Normal Accident? An exploratory study of 10 cases of journalistic deception “deceptive news stories are more likely than authentic news stories to be filed from a remote location,” which, in the case of Glass’s piece Hack Haven remains true (2007).
Tom Goldstein, from the University of California, Berkeley, makes a good point. He claims “journalists cannot know everything. As appealing as it is to have first-hand accounts of what happened, journalists by and large rely on second-and and third-hand information. Journalists try to get closer to the action, as they should, and over the years in high isolated instances … they have resorted to deception by pretending to be someone they are not or by concealing their identities as journalists” (2012). This was Glass’s exact issue; in the interview of Stephen Glass himself, he admitted that he simply loved the excitement of people enjoying his stories. He just wanted every story to be another one of his best stories.
When an individual thinks about the situation at hand, many questions arise. The most popular question may be, why did Stephen Glass commit these tales? Newsroom’s Normal Accident? An exploratory study of 10 cases of journalistic deception’s authors Dominic L. Lasorsa and Jia Dai created a study in which they focused on how the organization of a newsroom can affect deception (2007). Five conclusions were made ranging from communication to the importance of fact checking. One of the conclusions that emerged from this study was that “in most of the deception cases studied here, the relationships between editors and reporters were built upon a personal as well as a professional trust.” We see this directly in Shattered Glass. Until Charles Lane became Glass’s boss, no one had considered looking into his work. Michael Kelly and Stephen Glass were had a greater personal relationship until Kelly was released. When Kelly was released, the situations arose.
In today’s society, it is typical for us to feel pressured to make certain decisions. This may have also been the case with Glass. I believe, that being students at Penn State, a lot of us work to uphold the reputation of our university. As a reporter at the New Republic, Glass had a reputation to uphold. A reporter from Vanity Fair said that Glass was one of the best up and coming reporters of the time (Lasora and Dai, 2007). Being so successful at such a young age only pushed Glass to continue to prosper. His way of flourishing, though, was not the most ethical decision morally-inclined journalists would have made. Stress can also make an individual do things outside of their element. As we see in the movie, it could be the stress of applying to law school that influenced Glass to commit these incidents.
It is hard to imagine being in the position of Stephen Glass. If, in the future, I find myself in that position, I will own up to the things I have done. Confessing the truth, explaining what you did, and apologizing for the mistakes you made would create a much better backlash than the one that Stephen Glass received. If an individual lies, and then continues to lie by covering up the previous ones, he or she is only digging themselves deeper and deeper into the mess.
Easier said than done, in a situation such as this one, it is of utmost importance to take the blame on yourself. You cannot blame your editors or your co-workers for letting these articles slip through the cracks. Morally, I would be inclined to tell everyone the truth. I am a girl of many words- so I am sure that it would not be difficult for me to explain what happened.
When dealing with a situation like this, consequences are inevitable. It is important to take each one and deal with it as it is happening. One way, which Glass did do, is to move on from the situation. Dwelling on the situation would be the worst thing for him to do. I would move on and try and find a different career path, like Glass did.
In a journalist’s career, one is bound to have to make decisions such as this one. What is important to remember is that one simple mistake can destroy the career of an individual. The public, your audience, reads your material because they trust that you will be straightforward and honest with them. If you want to fabricate and play with the details of stories, non-fiction may be the path choice that you want to follow.
Throughout the extensive research on the Stephen Glass story, I have a gained an important understanding of the significance of telling the truth in journalism. I am thankful to have a class here at Penn State that is teaching me, and showing me real life examples, of how truly relevant it is to have a paramount appreciation for journalistic ethics.
References
- Foreman, G. (2016). The Ethical Journalist: Making Responsible Decisions in the Digital Age. Hoboken: Wiley.
- Goldstein, T. (2012). The Brief Against Deception in Reporting. Journal Of Magazine & New Media Research, 13(1), 1-3.
- Lasorsa, D. L., & Jia, D. (2007). Newsroom’s Normal Accident?. Journalism Practice, 1(2), 159-174. doi:10.1080/17512780701275473
- Spurlock, J. (2016). Why Journalists Lie: The Troublesome Times for Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Brian Williams. Etc: A Review of General Semantics, 73(1), 71-76.