Shock and Awe is a movie that is based on the events of 9/11 and a group of journalists who worked at a consortium of 31 newspapers, called Knight Ridder. Knight Ridder was located in Washington D.C., so in their eyes, the attack was personal. The movie spends a lot of time focusing on the Bush administrations’ decision to invade Iraq after the attacks of September 11th. Based on the fact that Saddam Hussein apparently had in his possession, weapons of mass destruction, the decision to go to war seemed too easy for the administration. This group of journalists was committed to proving that the government used the allegation of Hussein possessing weapons as an excuse to invade the country and they did not stop until they proved that their theory was the truth. Diversity comes into play in the story since the journalists were reporting news that was based upon unpopular points of view, reporting the direct opposite news of other news outlets. One main ethical issue I noticed in the movie was when the journalists questioned whether they should publish certain stories or not, and this happened on several occasions. If a journalist is constantly unsure as to if they should publish something or not, that is a huge red flag as to what they are reporting on or how they are going about reporting on it. Another ethical issue from the film was when one of the journalists was angry with his wife when she canceled their subscription to the New York Times. The journalist said, “I need that for my work” This made me question why he actually needed another newspaper “for work” unless he was potentially plagiarizing. As I read in an article “plagiarism is rife, and only some of the most extreme cases are acted upon. This is especially the case in specialist newspapers and magazines targeted at particular industries, whose copy in many cases comprises minimally creative re-working of the content of media releases from suppliers. But the problem can also afflict the great names in journalism, as was evidenced by the departure of the Editor of the New York Times in mid-2003, as a result of the paper’s failure to detect and control fabrication and plagiarism by one of its reporters” (Clarke, 2006).
One of the main journalists in the film was actually criticized by his fellow journalists about how far they were willing to go to receive information. They believed they were fighting for the truth to be told, so as long as the information they were publishing was true, they shouldn’t feel any guilt. As for the issue of plagiarism, I am unsure if the character was implying that he uses information from the New York Times for his own stories, but the fact that I realized that just from watching the film, makes me realize how much of an issue plagiarism is.
After watching and being able to sit down and reflect on the movie, I realize I have 2 main takeaways. It is paramount for a journalist to produce honest work, even if it is an unpopular opinion, just like the journalists in the movie did. It is also extremely important not to plagiarize, even if it is from another news outlet, if you use other people’s work and do not give credit and cite it, you are plagiarizing.
Clarke, R. (2006). Plagiarism by Academics: More Complex Than It Seems. Journal of the Association of Information Systems,7(2).