 |
 |
Ten Ethical Principles for |
||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
           |
|
|
By Gary Pavela 1. Define a set of values Journalists depend on social values like honesty, openness, and freedom of expression. The larger society, in turn, depends on journalists to define and act upon values designed to promote public understanding and civic participation. Most journalists believe they are part of a profession committed to "the people's right to know." The "right to know" is meaningless, however, if people are told falsehoods, or if titillation takes priority over education. There is a difference between good journalism and bad journalism. That difference will be defined by standards that can be identified, debated, and affirmed—both inside and outside the profession. The way journalism is practiced also shapes the character of the practitioners. The essayist Michel de Montaigne wrote that "I have no more made my book, than my book has made me." Journalists—especially young journalists forming the habits of their craft—need to consider whether their work will make them thoughtful or superficial; inquisitive or invasive; understanding or cynical. They mold their characters as they define their careers. 2. Tell the truth Objective truth—like flawless beauty—is an illusive goal. Nonetheless, just as human beings pursue many aims that can never be fully achieved, it remains a worthy endeavor for journalists to commit themselves to trying to tell the truth. Postmodernism proclaims the truth that truth is an illusion. That inherently contradictory view would be the end of journalism. It leads to the conclusion that the only difference between writing propaganda and reporting news is subtlety in deception. There’s nothing progressive or profound in the Postmodernist conception of truth. Totalitarians of the left and the right practiced it throughout much of the twentieth century. The challenge for contemporary journalists is to learn from the mistakes of the past, and to appreciate how fragile—and worthy of protection—evolving ideas of "fairness" and "objectivity" are, even if human beings never fully achieve them. A commitment to telling the truth does not preclude moral indignation. Indeed, telling the truth often promotes moral indignation. What Postmodernism omits, and journalists must remember, is that moral indignation can't exist without morality—including the morality associated with truth seeking, and truth telling. 3. Respect human dignity Journalists should treat others the way they would want to be treated, respecting the human dignity of every person. Journalists play an important public role, constituting a "fourth estate." Even as public figures, however, journalists expect to be accorded some degree of privacy—and treated with civility. What journalists expect for themselves they must accord to others, being especially wary of the temptation to humiliate or embarrass others for the superficial aims of providing sport or entertainment. 4. Recognize the complexity of human nature People are complicated. The full scope of their personalities can't be captured by phrases or labels. The description of aims or motives must be done with caution, recognizing the limits of any attempt to understand the contents of the human heart. Anyone who wants to understand human motivation needs to consider human behavior. Pulitzer Prize winning author and scientist Rene Dubos described the contradictions and richness of human nature in his book The God Within (Scribners, 1972) p. 84: Every perceptive adult knows he is part beast and part saint, a mixture of folly and reason, love and hate, courage and cowardice. He can be at the same time believer and doubter, idealist and skeptic, altruistic citizen and selfish hedonist. The coexistence of these conflicting traits naturally causes tension but it is nonetheless compatible with sanity. In a mysterious way, the search for identity and the pursuit of self-selected goals harmonize opposites and facilitate the integration of discordant human traits into some kind of working accord.More than one observer has suggested a powerful tool designed to help journalists explore the complexities of human motivation, and to enhance fairness in reporting. That tool is the simple question "Why?" Answered seriously, and reported accurately, responses to the question "why" add richness and texture to decisions or actions that otherwise seem inexplicable, or one-dimensional. 5. Be distrustful of unchecked power. Experience has shown the destructive influence of unchecked power. Journalists in free societies perform the priceless service of helping to limit and disperse power. Power takes many forms, however. It is also exercised by journalists, who need to be as distrustful of unchecked power in themselves as they are in others. Creative thought needs to be given to internal checks on media power. An example of an internal check is the "Reader's Guide" published by the Stanford Daily, inviting readers to point out errors, and listing the "rights" available to individuals contacted by Daily reporters (e.g. "You can . . . refuse to comment, . . . speak off the record . . . [or] [a]sk the reporter to read back your quotes . . . "). By checking and limiting their power, journalists affirm a sense of responsibility to the larger society, and give substance to the civic virtues they expect in others. 6. Foster a diversity of views Evolution promotes diversity—and for good reason: diversity enhances life. Newspapers or other media that become dominant voices in a community will enhance the life of that community by allowing a diversity of experiences and opinions to be heard. Most newspapers print a limited selection of letters to the editor. Some cultivate diverse opinions on an "Op-Ed" page. USA TODAY recruits and publishes opposing views directly below editorials. The Harvard Crimson does the same when members of the editorial board disagree. College journalists, skilled in the use of electronic media, should be able to devise even better ways to promote richer and wider dialogue on campus. 7. Challenge "group think." Human beings are social animals, inclined to work together. There are risks as well as benefits associated with that trait. The risk for journalists is that intellectual laziness will diminish personal initiative, invite plagiarism, and discourage the creativity that allows courageous individuals to see what groups sometimes miss. American journalism has the distinct look of work done by "a herd of independent minds." There are—as journalist John Leo has written—"conventional narrative lines" that most reporters are tempted to follow, often because they fit what "newsroom culture" seems to require. The best and most creative journalism will find new ways of seeing and thinking, including ways to inform people about events that can be seen as accomplishments rather than crises. 8. Take time to listen and to think. The public rarely benefits from speedy reporting of false information. Even more important than timeliness is accuracy—and the insights that come when journalists take time to listen carefully and think deeply. Former Boston Globe writer Patricia Smith—discharged for fabricating events and quotes in her column—wrote a final apology to her readers on June 19, 1998, and stated that she had "set out to be 10 times as good by doing 10 times as much." "I didn't establish priorities," Ms. Smith admitted, "and the first casualty was time." American society is addicted to speed. The fruits of that addiction include superficial analysis, damaged careers, and diminished understanding of the true complexity and beauty of the world. 9. Encourage criticism and self-examination Journalists understand the cleansing power of thoughtful criticism. They have much to gain by turning that power inward as well as outward, in the form of regular self-criticism. The practice of any profession is improved by self-criticism. A good approach for journalists, suggested by Donald W. Shriver in the Spring/Summer 1998 issue of the Media Studies Journal, is for reporters to devote regular time in staff meetings to answering two questions: "How could I have done better" and "what do we mean by 'better?'" 10. Correct mistakes Journalists lose their effectiveness when they forfeit their credibility. Trust can be maintained—or regained—if journalists correct serious mistakes fully and openly. The credibility of the media rises and falls in proportion to its arrogance. One antidote for arrogance, described in a February 16, 1998 New York Times article, is an expanded "corrections" policy at the British newspaper The Guardian. Among other initiatives, The Guardian appointed a "reader's editor" who presides over a prominent daily report of corrections, and "writes a weekly column about the inner workings of the paper." "In a lot of papers," the Guardian reader's editor told The Times, "they see admitting a mistake as a sign of weakness. But if you feel you're producing a newspaper with an intelligent readership, why not treat them as intelligent?" Better advice for college journalists would be hard to find. n
COLLEGE ADMINISTRATION PUBLICATIONS, INC. To contact us, please:
[Who We Are]
[Critical Issues]
[Reference Desk]
|