Definition:
Honesty is something that isn’t optional in the journalistic world, it’s a duty that is necessary so that people know that they can trust not only you, but news as a whole. A media company’s reputation can hinge on the shoulders of a single journalist’s published stories. This was the case with Stephen Glass who after reaching success with his news stories decided that to keep up the pace, he needed to mix fiction with fact and in some cases, completely fabricate future stories. Some of these stories he wrote for his own self pleasure, some fictional sources and some with false facts that helped feed into negative stereotypes. After it was outed that he was doing this he was fired and his career and reputation were destroyed.
Analysis:
In class we discussed the ethics of lying in media whether directly or by being intentionally misleading or twisting facts. Honesty is needed not only so that people are hearing the truth and can have valid opinion on topics, but also so that they can trust the media as a whole. This is an accepted and understood duty of people that decide to become journalists. So, if people like Stephen Glass and Brian Williams that we discussed in class understand this, then why do they lie? According to Jefferson Spurlock it’s because “Self-esteem and social acceptance are two factors […] [liars] lie to protect themselves, look good, gain financially or socially and avoid punishment”. By Spurlock’s definition, lying comes down to being selfish either for self-gain in their self-esteem or for financial and work-related benefits. If this is truly the case that means that people like Stephen Glass put themselves before their co-workers, readers and viewers, the media as a whole and their duties as journalists.
This leads to the next ethical question discussed in class which is; does it make sense to allow people back into journalism who have a track record of lying? This reaches far beyond his personal undoing into the ripple effects his actions had on his co-workers and the journalism industry as a whole. According to Matthew Ehrlich “Mother Jones [said] Glass wrote ’propaganda’ that ‘gave credence to the assumptions his editors and readers already wanted to believe’”. This is a public figure not only losing trust in the paper as a whole and individuals within the paper meaning Glass’ actions also hurt the credibility of other individuals and jeopardized their careers. If an individual has so little regard for the industry they were in and for their co-workers it would not make sense to hire them again as if they seem to have changed you cannot tell if that’s the truth as they’re already known as good liars. This is especially the case if you don’t want someone that has a known record of hurting individual’s and company’s credibility.
Conclusion:
I cannot say that as an employer that I would ever be able to hire someone with a record like Stephen Glass. Though I strongly believe in second chances, I cannot say I believe in them when their second chance could jeopardize the livelihoods of others. Glass could have a second chance as a person in my eyes, but not as an employee. He had proven himself to be a liar and in turn selfish and jobs are a team effort, if someone is only looking out for themselves they do not fit into a team.
References:
Ehrlich, M. C. (2005). Shattered Glass, Movies, and the Free Press Myth. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 29(2), 103–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/0196859904272741
Spurlock, J. (2016). WHY JOURNALISTS LIE: THE TROUBLESOME TIMES FOR JANET COOKE, STEPHEN GLASS, JAYSON BLAIR, AND BRIAN WILLIAMS: A REVIEW OF GENERAL SEMANTICS. Et Cetera, 73(1), 71-76. Retrieved from http://ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/login?url=https://search-proquest- com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/docview/2028122407?accountid=13158