Situation Definition:
Journalists have an extremely important duty to report factual information so that the public can make an informed decision. Society, myself included, relies on journalistic findings to get pertinent information about current events etc. Therefore, when the information being presented is fabrication, it is a grave offense.
This type of fabrication was seen in the movie “Shattered Glass”. Stephen Glass is a young, seemingly successful journalist for the publication The New Republic. His stories always seem to entertain, but that absurd comedic element in his writing led to his demise. We follow the story to find out that Glass fabricated 27 of his 41 articles published, and denied the fabrication claims until he could no longer keep his story straight.
Therefore, the issues that come to light through this story are important to talk about, in order to make the public aware of this issue, and to ensure fabrications like this do not happen again. Two ethical issues that stood out in “Shattered Glass”, are lying and the exploitation of trust.
Analysis:
Furthermore, it is no secret that what Glass did during his career at The New Republic not only wrong, but truly unethical. The two ethical issues that are prominent to the audience are lying and the exploitation of trust. Perhaps Glass decided to break ethical code to further his career and writing triumphs. I do not think he intentionally meant to hurt those affected, but his actions did. If I was in a similar situation, I would have come clean much sooner to avoid a worse punishment. Glass maybe considered doing this, but thought he could get away with it.
Glass certainly wasn’t honest with his colleagues, his editor, and his readers when he decided to fabricate a majority of the stories he wrote. Honesty is a crucial element in journalistic writing, because it creates a healthy, open communication between all parties.
An example of the consequences of lying is seen in a case about Georgia journalism students. According to Quill, two University of Georgia journalism students plagiarized articles in the school newspaper and were unable to graduate in May 2004 on account of the clear violation of the school’s academic honesty policy (Thomas, 2004). Although Glass fabricated and these students plagiarized, the concept that lying in journalism, and in life, is highly unacceptable. Both Glass, and these students, lost their future and reputation because of lying.
Another ethical issue depicted was Glass’s exploitation of trust. Glass had the trust of his readers, co-workers, and editor. He knew that because he had already established a trust base with these people, he could exploit it and manipulate it. According to the publication Journalism, “The fact that personal and possibly anecdotal evidence may have significant long-term effects on audience levels of trust is potentially problematic” (Livio & Cohen, 2018). In other words, breaking, manipulating, and exploitering the trust of those in your professional field is extremely unethical.
These two ethical issues are so atrocious because this causes the public to not trust Glass, and in particular,The New Republic. Once one ethical issue is unsurfaced, this creates a general distrust for that journalist and his/her publication. These damages could result in bad publicity, a huge loss of money, etc. Also, the readers and general public will now be weary of trusting real journalism from this incident and this cycle continues.
Conclusion:
Hence, what Glass did in the movie breaks numerous ethical principles. His lying and exploitation of trust are highlighted prominently. A possible solution to this issue is to come clean to his editor instead of continuing to write made-up stories. He did not have to wait until he got caught at 27 fabricated stories; he could have come clean much earlier on his own. I think if he would have been honest earlier, he could have been able to salvage his career and readership. His consequence might have been suspension without pay, but it would have been better than losing his career and reputation.
Another possible solution to this problem could have been better fact checking from the editors. Although Glass’s fabrication is not their fault, they are partly at fault for his stories making it to press. If they had researched the facts of his articles such as Jukt Micronics more thoroughly, perhaps they could have caught him before publishing. A possible consequence may be embarrassment on the editor’s part, and a loss of job on Glass’s part. The consequences in all of these solutions are grave, but so is breaking ethical code.
References:
Livio, O., & Cohen, J. (2018, May). ‘Fool me once, shame on you’: Direct personal experience and media trust. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=59&sid=adf0b4c9-1b38-4932-97ec-9a4307bafdda@sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#db=ufh&AN=129612554
Thomas, J. (2004, June). Plagiarizing Students Unable to Graduate. Retrieved September 20, 2018, from http://web.b.ebscohost.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/ehost/detail/detail?vid=49&sid=adf0b4c9-1b38-4932-97ec-9a4307bafdda@sessionmgr103&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWhvc3QtbGl2ZSZzY29wZT1zaXRl#AN=13758427&db=ufh