Situation Definition:
The movie, Shattered Glass, is based on the true story of Stephen Glass, a journalist, who was busted for writing many fabricated articles for the New Republic newspaper. Glass is definitely not an ethical person, and this becomes apparent from the beginning of the movie. One of the first moments when I noticed that Glass was suspicious was when he was first caught in a lie. He would pitch his stories during meetings as if they were real, when they were only partially factual or sometimes completely fabricated. He would continue to submit fabricated news that would be posted for the public to read and believe.
He often deceived not only his audience, by faking entire stories, but also his co-workers and so-called “friends.” Glass did not just fabricate his stories, but continued to deceive others by producing fake sources in order to back up his lies. Deceiving your boss, somebody who believes and supports you, is definitely not ethical.
Analysis:
When the movie first began, I was intrigued by how likable Stephen Glass was. His coworkers were enthralled by him and he definitely knew how to speak to women well. This definitely helped him in regard to getting away with his antics. In regard to fabrication, I believe he did this because he thought he could get away with it. He fully knew what he was doing was wrong, and he did not care. Although Glass fabricated his stories, I believe his work could be compared to plagiarism in the fact that what he did was clearly wrong. “All over the country, meanwhile, students were and still are being upbraided, reprimanded, given F’s on papers, flunked in courses, and expelled from universities for doing this plagiarism thing, this indefinable thing,” (Howard, 2000). Students are very well-aware of ethical standards and are taught how to avoid such instances. Glass graduated from an Ivy-league college, as stated in the movie, and worked for a popular newspaper. He was well aware of what was ethical and unethical in his field of work, yet he did it anyway. Although he may have been struggling to find newsworthy stories, making up news is not the way to solve the problem.
Along with fabrication, deceiving the audience is ethically wrong. Glass took extreme measures to try to back up his lies, such as creating fake websites, emails, and even voicemails for people and companies who have never existed. Glass went to such lengths to cover his lies because he knew if he was caught he would get in trouble. It is clear Glass knew he was acting unethically. I believe he did all of this in order to feel successful and accepted. He was clearly a “people-pleaser” by the way he acted in the movie and he panicked when he found out his cover may be blown. “He longs to be admired and loved; he cheats to avoid rejection,” (Shapiro, 2006). Glass did not want to fail, he wanted to succeed and he wanted people to love him for it. Although he knew he was wrong, he did not care so as long as he thrived.
Conclusion:
After reading peer-reviewed sources, I believe Stephen Glass so desperately needed approval. In order to avoid all of his problems, which eventually ended his career as a journalist, he should have put in honest work. Any unethical behavior, whether it be fabrication, plagiarism, or deception, will not get anyone eternal success. Glass would have never ran into the problems he had if he reported truthful news, even if the stories were not as “exciting” as his fabricated ones.
His boss and colleagues are people who believed in him and who trusted him. He should have been honest with them. In order to build strong relationships, honesty is key. Glass ruined any of his credibility when he lied to his co-workers. Glass was so talented at deceiving people that his own boss backed up his lies, simply because his boss did not believe Glass would ever lie. This could have cost Glass’s boss his career. That was extremely unfair of Glass to put his boss in that position and is sheer proof of why Glass should have never lied to his colleagues.
References:
Shapiro, I. (2006, January). Why They Lie: Probing the Explanations for Journalistic Cheating. Canadian Journal of Communication, 265.
Howard, R. M. (2000). Sexuality, textuality: The cultural work of plagiarism. College English, 62, 473-491.
