Situation Definition
The case of Stephen Glass is an extraordinary case of journalistic ethics being thrown out the window. The issues presented in the Stephen Glass case revolve around two main ethical failures. One being Stephens fabrication of entire stories and the second being the intentional, and thought out deception to Stephens readers and colleagues.
Analysis
Stephens fabrication of entire stories, events, falsification of witnesses, and sources is an extremely troubling case of unethical journalism at its core. While some of Stephens articles had varying arrays of truth to them, the majority of his articles were totally fabricated events, things that never happened, and people who never existed. You might be questioning Stephens motives for lying, why did he do it. To answer that you can look at the same reasons that the majority of people lie. According to Spurlock “Saltz observes that liars ‘lie to protect themselves, look good, gain financially or socially and avoid punishment’” (2016).
As we discussed in class the process of editing and fact-checking is by nature designed to detect honest human errors, it is however not made to detect intentional deceit and bold-faced lies. There are cases in which deception is considered ethical in the journalism field, those cases mostly revolve around the need for deception in gathering important information, which is a very different type of deception from what Stephen Glass was doing. Stephen Glass’s journalistic deception is not a situation in which deception is tolerated in journalism. As discussed in class journalistic deception is considered morally right when it is needed to gather critical information that is important in regards to breaking news and uncovering truths. However, it is Stephens intentional deception directed at his boss, colleagues, and readers. Interestingly, while many people will put all of the blame onto Stephens’ shoulders, according to Lasorsa “some scholars considered journalistic deception as ‘an occupational construct’ shaped by professional demands and newsroom culture (2007). While I don’t believe that this defends Stephen Glass’s actions, it does give a compelling explanation as to why situations like the case of Stephen Glass occur in journalism.
Conclusion
The journalistic code of ethics of which revolves around values like Truthfulness and accountability are being entirely disregarded when it comes to cases like the Stephen Glass case. I believe one way to combat similar cases like this one is to be observant and aware of coworkers and employees work. If Stephens coworkers and friends had been more aware and more suspicious of his, at the time, exemplary and entertaining stories perhaps he wouldn’t have gotten away with his deception for so long. Alternatively, a drawback to this solution could be that it might result in an over suspicious and untrusting work environment.
References
Spurlock, J. (2016). WHY JOURNALISTS LIE: THE TROUBLESOME TIMES FOR JANET COOKE, STEPHEN GLASS, JAYSON BLAIR, AND BRIAN WILLIAMS. Et Cetera, 73(1), 71-76. Retrieved fromhttp://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest- com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/2028122407?accountid=13158
Lasorsa, D. L., & Dai, J. (2007). NEWSROOM’S NORMAL ACCIDENT?: An exploratory study of 10 cases of journalistic deception. Journalism Practice, 1(2), 159-174. doi:10.1080/17512780701275473