Blog 2 – Shattered Glass – Victor Cervantes

Situation

Throughout the movie, “Shattered Glass,” the story was able to depict a perfect situation in which a journalist completely disregards codes of ethics to obtain personal satisfaction and interest from the general public. One ethical message that I can pull from this film derives from truth. A journalist has the moral responsibility of reporting the truth and that was not the case throughout the movie. Another Ethical message that can be obtained from this film is the deception of fabrication. 

The movie portrays a very young journalist, Stephen Glass, who seemed to be doing everything correctly and very well organized. On the contrary, Stephen was lying about some of the events he had written about and even made up details to support these lies. Two things a journalist is never supposed to do. 

 

Analysis

Stephen Glass committed a very serious offense in deceiving his readers and colleagues. One’s reputation is something that is forever carried and to ruin something of that manner can be extremely detrimental. In a letter to D.A.R.E, a drug education program, Stephen glass apologizes for damaging their reputation due to a fabricated article, “I want to express my regret and apology for falsely disparaging D.A.R.E. in the above-referenced articles by willfully fabricating several incidents … I did this in order to sensationalize the stories without regard to the harm and detriment my fabrications and falsehoods would cause to D.A.R.E. and people affiliated with D.A.R.E”

Glass had Fabricated more than half of his stories at The New Republic. The Newspaper was one of the most popular political newspapers at the time and was even said to be the only newspaper to be on the president’s Air Force One. Shortly after Glass’ actions had been exposed the newspaper took a steady decline. Their reputation was tarnished. 

In an article by Cheryl Miller, she wrote of how the supreme court, for the first time in eleven years, had taken review of Stephen glass’ entrance for the bar exam due to a moral character case. Glass had a very timid nature but the privileges he abused followed him for years to come even as he attempted to shift careers.

Upon being placed in a similar circumstance I would never recommend fabricating any sort of story for personal gain. If I were to write a story I would collect the facts and envision an interesting story based on those facts. These tactics are implemented by great writers. Based on a book by W. Bradley Wendel, he suggests that anyone would do the same if they were placed in a similar situation. He even references the Stanford Prison Experiment as evidence but the consequences of being caught would be far too great. 

 

Conclusion

One thing I have taken from this section is that when it comes to journalism, you must always take the best precaution to ensure that you are doing everything ethically. There are consequences to breaking any of these rules that could affect you, your peers, and whatever you represent. Stephen Glass broke these rules years ago and he is now being used as a lesson in college courses on what not to do. 

It is important to discuss these issues because of how fast news travels in today’s society. News stories need to promote understanding, not deception.

 

References 

Miller, C. (2011, November 17). Justices to Decide if Lying Journalist Fit to Practice Law. Retrieved from https://www.law.com/therecorder/almID/1202532869843&slreturn=1/?slreturn=20200113224704

Wendel, W. B. (2014). Stephen Glass, Situational Forces, And The Fundamental Attribution Error. Retrieved from https://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/joolaw4&id=106&men_tab=srchresults

Glass, S. (1999, January 25). Letter to D.A.R.E. from Stephen Glass. Retrieved from https://www.nationalfamilies.org/prevention/glass_letter.html 

This entry was posted in C409Blogs. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply