The first intense ethical message brought to me as a result of Steve glass’ actions is fabrication. Our textbook defines fabrication as when one is “making things up and passing them off as genuine” (Foreman, 2016, p. 134). 27 out of the 41 stories written by Glass during his time at New Republic contained fabricated elements. He made up people, places, events and much more to the point entire stories of his would be completely non-fiction.
The second intense ethical message brought to me was how Glass decided to try to cover up his fabrication rather than admit to what he did. When his editor, Charles Lane confronted him about the authenticity of Glass’ written piece, Hack Heaven he chose to present fake notes to Lane, and take him to a false location that he had written about in his article. He also had his brother pose as an executive of Junkt Micronics, the made up company in Glass’ piece, to have a conversation with Lane and even created a fake website for Junkt. It was not until lawyers were involved that Glass admitted to his actions.
I attribute Glass’ addiction to the fabrication of his stories to a love of notoriety. He must have adored all the attention he got from his colleagues and the praise from readers hungry for more stories. Maybe at first he started lying a little because he wanted to make a boring story more interesting. Or maybe he thought adding a simple fake quote would help tie some pieces together and make it sound more substantiated. But after the first few times, other than the attention he got, it became a requirement for Glass to fabricate. He placed an imaginary pressure on himself to consistently deliver great, unbelievable news because that’s what he assumed others expected from him.
As for him covering up his fabrication, he must have realized the hole he dug himself into was too great for his editor to give him a pass once it was revealed. He was terrified of losing his career and his support from peers and readers. I’m sure Glass realized if he came immediately clean with Lane from the start of him questioning Hack Heaven, Glass would instantly be fired. He thought that if he could put the wool over Lane’s head, he would never find out about his other fabricated stories, so his job and reputation would be safe. Obviously, that was not the case.
The Society of Professional Journalists’ code of ethics is described as the gold standard for journalism ethics (Slattery, 2016). In 2014, the SPJ revised their 1996 code in which it states that journalists should seek the truth and report it. The code calls for journalists to be responsible “for the accuracy of their work,” or to “verify information” and to “never deliberately distort facts or context”. “Similar language appears in the old and new versions of the code which suggests that the society has not significantly changed its thinking about the matter of seeking the truth” (Slattery, p. 9). Glass completely crossed the line and broke these codes of ethics by fabricating. He was not at all attempting to write the truth in his stories. Therefore, he didn’t act accordingly in how a journalist should go about their work.
Janet Cooke’s story about an 8 year old heroin addict is another infamous example of fabrication. “Winning a Pulitzer and making a name for herself were, by her own admission, more noteworthy to her than upholding the larger issues of journalistic ethics, responsibility, integrity, and credibility” (Urbanski, 2016, p. 9). But for both Cooke and Glass, their short time of success was destroyed by a lifetime of never being able to work in journalism again. No publication is going to trust them because they violated so badly a foremost principle of their profession.
If I was in Glass’ position, I would instead work extremely hard to get those interesting stories he was chasing rather than make them up. Lying is just a ticking time bomb waiting to go off and eventually the truth will come out. When feeling the pressure to come up with great content, I recommend that journalists speak to their fellow colleagues about the way they are feeling. I’m sure they will empathize and help the struggling person realize they aren’t not alone in their challenges. Furthermore, if a journalist is to ever make a mistake, they should always admit to it to lessen the trouble they will be in.
Due to all the stories Glass fabricated, I definitely would have fired him like Lane. What Glass did was unforgivable and should have stopped after the first time. The only solution to fabrication is to talk to someone why you want to lie so they can show you why it’s not a good idea. The lesson to learn here is just to simply always tell the truth.
In regards to Glass covering up his lies, he deserved to be fired for that too. If he had been honest from the moment Lane questioned him, perhaps being suspended for a couple years would have been a good enough punishment. Instead he went to extreme lengths to hide the truth. To resolve all his problems he should have just admitted what he did. It would’ve caused less stress and maybe he would’ve gotten a lighter punishment. The lesson to learn here is to be honest about the wrong doings you commit.
References
Foreman, G. (2016). The ethical journalist: Making responsible decisions in the pursuit of news. John Wiley & Sons.
Slattery, K. L. (2016). The Moral Meaning of Recent Revisions to the SPJ Code of Ethics. Journal of Media Ethics, 31, 2–17.
Urbanski, S. (2016). A neo-Aristotelian critique of” Jimmy’s World”: New ideas in a long-debated journalism fabrication. American Communication Journal, 18.