Situation Definition
The movie “Shattered Glass” focuses on an up and coming journalist named Stephen Glass. Glass was a writer for the New Republic who wrote a lot of fascinating stories, many of which were almost too good to be true. However, some of the stories he wrote were in fact too good to be true. Out of the 41 stories Glass had published in his career at the New Republic, at least 27 of them were fabricated in some way.
In the movie, Glass is portrayed to be a very witty and trusting journalist. He was heavily admired by many of his peers and coworkers. Glass used his charming character and good relationships with colleagues to hide the fact that his work as a journalist was unethical in many ways. Two main takeaways from the movie were how Glass fabricated stories to make a name for himself in the journalism world, and how he used his newly gained reputation and trustworthiness to continue to make up lies.
Analysis
Steven Glass was a manipulator and a liar. He originally started fabricating stories to get his name out there and build his reputation. He wanted the public to know that there was a story to be heard, even though oftentimes there wasn’t. Glass made up quotes, settings, and even entire stories to make his reporting more appealing to the readers. If the story he was covering wasn’t good enough, he would come up with something more “juicy” to hook the readers in. These early violations of ethics in journalism led him down a slippery slope in his career. Once he established himself as a promising and remarkable storyteller, he had to keep his reputation. This slippery slope caused Glass to become lazy and unethical when covering his stories
Glass was already a rising star by the age of 25. During his early tenure at The New Republic, Glass’s first breakout story attacked Michael Jacobson, the head of the Center for Science in the Public interest. As mentioned in “Shattered Glass, Movies, and the Free Press Myth”, Jacobson questioned some of the accusations that Glass had made about him. However, Glass’s editor, Michael Kelly, firmly backed Glass and called Jacobson a liar. In a later story Glass wrote, he called a group of young conservatives “dejected, depressed, drunk and dumb” and that they were engaging in “repellant” games of sexual humiliation. Similarly to Glass’s previous story, Kelly stood behind him. (Bissinger, 1998; Glass 1997, pp. 19-20). By backing up Glass, Kelly enabled him to continue to fabricate stories. Glass thought that as long as he could make up good enough notes to cover his tracks, his editor would keep sticking up for him.
This is what caused Glass to rationally believe he could keep fabricating stories. He took advantage of the trust he had gained and believed that if he had the confidence of his colleagues he could keep lying. His trustworthiness allowed Glass to keep building a witty and charming personality. He was able to manipulate everyone into thinking he was the smartest in the room, always unable to uncover the best stories. While Glass may not of maliciously or intentionally tried to hurt anyone, the lies he was making up was clear case of defamation of character. Before writing stories, Glass was a fact checker. He knew the ins and outs of getting stories published and was able to take advantage of the system. It was said in the article “The Great Pretender” that Glass would often submit stories late so that the fact checkers were pressed for time. The editor that ended up uncovering Glass’s unethical practices, Charles Lane, said in the same article that Glass would provide fake letterheads of phony organizations, fictional notes, and even fake voicemails and phone calls. “Any fact-checking system is built on trust,” said Kelly. “If a reporter is willing to fake notes, it defeats the system. Anyway, the real vetting system is not fact checking but the editor. It’s the editor’s responsibility to spot red flags.” Ann Dowd (1998). Ultimately, Glass built up his character and trust to be able to manipulate his fact checkers and editors.
Conclusion
“Shattered Glass” focused on the mistakes a young journalist like Stephen Glass can make in their early careers. However, it is important to realize that journalists are supposed to report on behalf of the public’s best interest. Fabricating sources, events, and entire stories abuses the trust of the public and is an ethical mistake no journalist should ever make. Fabrication can hurt other people, companies, and even yourself, as in Glass’s case. Once I realized I was getting away with fabricating, I would start reporting more honestly. Telling the truth and getting the facts right is always the best practice in journalism, no matter if the story isn’t “juicy” enough to gain national headlines.
References
Ehrlich, M. C. (2005). Shattered Glass, Movies, and the Free Press Myth. Journal of Communication Inquiry, 29(2), 103–118
Dowd, A. (1998, July 1). The Great Pretender. Columbia Journalism Review, pp. 14-15.