Situation Definition
The movie, Shattered Glass, centers around a young, up and coming journalist, Stephen Glass, at The New Republic, who is remembered for his downright questionable ethics. Glass was eventually caught lying about major characters and details throughout his stories that were proven to be completely made up or bending the truth. Two main ethical issues that really stood out to me during the movie, Shattered Glass, was the blatant fabrication of facts and sources in his articles as well as the lack of remorse or guilt he felt when his colleagues were catching on to him and after the fact when the truth was already out.
Analysis
Stephen Glass was a talented writer but let one small white lie lead to another which eventually turned into producing articles based on complete lies as well as the fabrication of sources. I believe Stephen Glass did this to enhance his writing and impress his colleagues by creating, what they thought were, intriguing and outstanding stories. The major ethical issue with this is that he was outright lying to his colleagues and all of the readers of his work. In the paper, “Why Journalists Lie: The Troublesome Times For Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Brian Williams,” it cites factors for lying as self-esteem and social acceptance. It also quotes that “liars “lie to protect themselves, look good, gain financially or socially and avoid punishment” (Spurlock, n.d.). As a journalist, you are trusted by your company, colleagues, and readers to deliver truthful and accurate information. Glass said in an interview that he loved the feeling when people loved his stories. This is relatable as a journalist, but Glass quite frankly, never thought of the consequences that he would face if and when he was caught.
The second ethical issue I took offense to in “Shattered Glass” was after he was caught by his colleagues and the public about his false stories, he had no empathy or guilt about what he did. Throughout his employment at The New Republic, Glass built great relationships with his colleagues and was highly trusted and respected. Due to the respect Glass earned by his colleagues, they had a hard time believing he was capable of this deception and gave him several chances to restore his ethics in his work again. In the movie, after Glass was finally fired, he expected his colleagues to feel sorry for him and tried to guilt him into giving him his job back. Stephen Glass went on to write a book, The Fabulist, which was based on the exact situation he put himself in. In the ‘60 Minutes’ interview with CBS and Stephen Glass that we watched in class, he was not slightly remorseful about what he had done. In the paper, “Why They Lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating,” it says, “The Fabulist drips with self-justification and self- pity: “I can’t have any more people hate me . . . I’m sorry. I am truly sorry, I’m sorry . . .,” its protagonist tells a telephone operator at one point before crying himself to sleep.” The paper goes on to explain how Glass’ book, The Fabulist, is his attempt at sharing with the world his side of the story and blames work pressures and personal issues as a part of the reason (Shapiro, 2006). He not once apologized to his colleagues or is readers who he deceived for so long. Glass more so felt sorry for himself and the journalistic career he would likely never have again.
Conclusion
My initial reaction is anyone with normal ethical standards would have avoided this situation at all costs or at least “quit while they were ahead.” Glass was lucky in that he was given multiple opportunities to stop the fabrication before he was caught or confess to his colleagues who gave him multiple chances. In a world of “fake news” nowadays, this is completely inexcusable at any major publication and as soon as there is suspicion of false information or lying, you will likely be immediately released from your position. I also think in this situation a sincere apology would have gone a long way. When Glass was finally fired from The New Republic, he wanted his colleagues to feel bad for him and wanted them to feel guilty. He deceived his colleagues, who actually became his good friends, for so long and never really gave them the apology they deserved. If I were in Glass’ position, I would have accepted my firing and tried to leave The New Republic on the best terms as possible. I wouldn’t have been able to take back the lies but I think it says a lot about someone’s character as to how they react to a bad situation. In this case, I do not think Glass had the appropriate reaction. I took away a few lessons from the movie Shattered Glass. I related to Glass when he said in an interview that he loved when people loved his stories. As a journalist anyone wants their stories to be read and liked but I learned to not embellish them for this reason. Adding false information to your stories to make them seem sensational is only going to get you in trouble in the long run.
References
Shapiro, I. (2006, January). Why They Lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating. Canadian Journal of Communication, 4(3). doi:10.22230/cjc.1977v4n3a182
Spurlock, J. (n.d.). Why Journalists Lie: The Troublesome Times For Janet Cooke, Stephen Glass, Jayson Blair, and Brian Williams. A Review of General Semantics.