In the film Shattered Glass, we learn the story of Stephen Glass who is a reporter for the New Republic that seems to have gained his notoriety from the exciting stories he tends to report on. Glass seems to be living a relatively comfortable life as a reporter, but unfortunately, as we would come to learn, Glass’s exciting stories, weren’t exactly all true.
From an ethical standpoint, there were two very large issues that stuck out to me the most when it came to Glass doing what he did. The first and most obvious, issue that stuck out to me was the fabrication of his reports. This is something that despite the fact it will inevitably bring trouble, still occurs today. Another issue that stuck out and kind of rubbed me the wrong way, was how easy how constant, Glass lying was. This was something that he clearly had no issue doing and was apparent from the very beginning when it came to his lies about the antics of the Young Republicans at a convention.
Watching this film, it’s glaringly obvious that there were more than a few ethical issues at stake, and there seems to be this common question of: “Why did Stephen Glass do what he did?” My theory is that he wanted the success and glory that came with being a successful reporter and some people will do almost anything for success. There was a mention about how he felt a sort of ‘rush’ when it came to breaking one of his exciting stories, and there’s a chance that this had ended up leading to him fabricating his stories, not only just to get that ‘rush’ again, but because it would help establish him as more of a well-known reporter, which in turn would lead to more money and potential jobs down the road.
A journal entry titled: “Why they lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating.” Goes into a lot of depth in regards to the Stephen Glass situation. Much like I did, the entry touches up on ambition being a part of the reason for journalists cheating, as well as journalists rushing to make deadlines. But this journal stresses that sometimes it can be completely unrelated to those factors. These factors didn’t seem to play as large of a role in Stephen Glass’ career. The following is a quote from a Stephen Glass during a 60 minutes interview, promoting his book:
“…I wrote something on my computer and I let it stand. And then it ran in the magazine and I said to myself what I said every time, ‘You must stop…’ But I didn’t…I loved the electricity, I loved going to story conference meetings and telling people what my story was going to be and seeing them in front of me, excited. I wanted every story to be a home run. (Shapiro, I. (2006)”
This is something that seems like something that perhaps he just did once, not of because he wanted to, and then just got hooked. I don’t think glass fully understood the potential ramifications of his actions when he was lying in regards to his work. I think this is something that Glass should have taken note of before getting carried away, had he done it once or twice, and then stopped? Things could’ve been different.
The Columbia Journalism Review goes into more details about the amount of time and effort Glass put into keeping up with his lies. It wasn’t uncommon for him to submit his work when editors were pressed for time, and to use fake fax documents, or letterheads or organizations that he had completely made up (Dowd, A. R. (1998). Glass comes off as quite insecure and it seems as if he was doing all this because he was seeking validation from everyone.
As cliché as it sounds, I think the Stephen Glass story has a key theme of honesty always being the best policy. No matter the consequences, people are always going to play a little dirty and do what they can to get ahead, but it’s just not worth it. The truth is always going to come out at some point, and to me, it just makes more sense to stay honest so there’s no constant worry of the truth eventually coming out. Credibility cannot only make or break an entire journalism career, but it can also very much hurt the company that said journalist works for. With lying being as rampant in society as it is today, it’s up to journalists to stay honest and bring some truth to everyone’s life.
References:
Dowd, A. R. (1998). THE GREAT PRETENDER. Columbia Journalism Review, 37(2), 14-15.
Shapiro, I. (2006). Why They Lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating. Canadian Journal Of Communication, 31(1), 261-266.