There are two major ethical issues in Shattered Glass, the story of disgruntled journalist Stephen Glass, that plague the field of journalism. One issue, the “reality boundary” (Sims, 2009), is a thin line that some journalists find themselves crossing, whether it is intentionally or unintentionally. Putting your byline on anything that isn’t one-hundred percent accurate can, and should, be an enormous dent in your credibility as a journalist.
In addition, favoring the deontological approach over the utilitarian approach in publications is crucial, though quite difficult. All too often, the exact opposite is the case. The deontological side of things suggests that journalists should “report the news, as explosive, discomforting, or controversial as it may be, and let the chips fall where they may” (Plaisance, 2017). The utilitarian approach protects the public from outcry and fear, even if it means making things sound different than they are through “pressure to ‘sanitize’ the news” (Plaisance, 2017.)
The reality boundary sounds relatively simple to comprehend but it is actually far from it. Literary journalism is all about the facts but there are ways to cross certain lines harmlessly, such as when a writer leaves literary journalism temporarily and crosses into “science writing or history” (Sims, 2009), which can mix together as long everything under those umbrellas remains factual. Articles that reference history or scientific studies, when properly attributed and checked and deemed to be facts, are perfectly acceptable.
Tracy Kidder’s novel Old Friends is a great example of following this boundary. Kidder “spent a year researching the nursing home” (Sims, 2009) to come up with his accurate depiction of the main characters of his novel. A review of his novel complained that the old guys should’ve been more stubborn and unpleasant to make it more accurate. His response after that review was about as perfectly succinct and accurate as possible: “in journalism you have to deal with the world as you find it” (Sims, 2009).
Glass did no such thing. He not only made up stories as he went along but he also conjured up people within those stories to make it believable. He even went as far as creating websites and phone numbers for Jukt Micronics, a fictional major software company crucial to one of his fictional pieces, to cover his back and get past The New Republic’s fact checkers. When things sway more towards fiction, opinion or even omission of facts, one has crossed the boundary into a dark, dark dimension. Glass lived in that dimension, and his career as a journalist ended when it caught up to him.
The second of the two major issues, erroneously favoring utilitarian ideals over deontological ideals, is also a pressing concern in journalism. Ethical journalism should follow the same rules as testimonies in courts of law. People say “I swear to tell the truth and nothing but the truth so help me god” when they’re sworn in. In journalism, the truth, and nothing but the truth, should be published as fact.
The faulty mindset “that journalists must, of course, be mindful of the consequences of their work, particularly when it comes to potential harmful effects of some information” (Sims, 2017) causes journalists to omit things in certain circumstances.
Glass clearly didn’t understand his duty as a journalist is supposed to feature “true public service” (Plaisance, 2017) and mindfulness of the consequences of his work. He not only faked his stories but he also doctored up his so called “notes” to make it look like he actually did thorough investigative reporting. When his editor pushed him on his sources towards the middle and end of the movie, Glass fed him fake phone numbers and fake people as he went along. He just cared about the attention and not at all about the consequences of his actions.
To solve the issue of the reality boundary, fact and fiction need to be clearly separated and those who teach ethics should prepare thorough presentations on this notion. Over time, Steven Glass has been joined by plenty once-prominent journalists, even some broadcast journalists (i.e. Brian Williams) in the fiction department. Fiction simply has no place in journalism, as credibility and fact checking are more important now than ever before.
In terms of addressing the deontological vs utilitarian approaches, deontological must be heavily stressed over utilitarian as the proper way to present information. Withholding information in today’s society is just not going to fly, especially with the hounds waiting at the gate on social media to wreck reputations when anything happens that is ever so slightly controversial. While emotions may be ignored at times, information cannot feel, it has no heart, it just exists, and people have the right to know information if the reporters get their hands on it and it is deemed factual without exception.
Works Cited
- Sims, N. (2009). Literary Journalism Studies Inaugural Issue,1(1), 1st ser., 7-15. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://abrahamson.medill.northwestern.edu/WWW/IALJS/LJS_v1n1_complete_issue.pdf#page=9
- Plaisance, P. L. (2017, June 08). Journalism Ethics. Retrieved September 19, 2018, from http://communication.oxfordre.com/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-89