The first class I took when I was a journalism freshman in college was (no surprise) Press Ethics. And I always believe that grasping press ethics is not something hard as long as you would pause and examine the way you report the whole event. However, more often than not, we don't have the luxury of pausing and examining our work before we hastily finish a piece right before the deadline, and send it off to the press.
Is it just because we don't have the time? I think it's more than that. The press ethics we learned over the years from text book seem to be so dry so it's hard for them to leave a deep impression on our mind. That's why I like it so much when someone can put it in just plain English and give that to us.
We learned all those codes of ethics telling us to seek truth, minimize harm, but the sentence above perfectly summarized it. Most of the time, journalists only look at an issue from the point of view of a journalist (which is totally legitimate). But by solely doing that we sometimes forget the issue of ethics. Is what we write about ethical from the point of the view of the interviewee? If we can ask ourselves in the way mentioned in this code of ethics, we could all have a easier way to determine what's ethical.
2. 不以批评报道相威胁或以表扬报道相引诱，为个人和小团体谋利。 (From the Codes of Ethics for Chinese Journalists and Editors)
(Don't threaten the subject with criticizing report, and don't lure the subject with favorable covering in order to gain personal benefits.)
What journalists should do as agents of people is giving voices to the weak and unheard. But it's because of the powerful they have (and at the same time, the relatively low income), some of the journalists would seek personal benefits from their subjects. This sometimes turned journalism into a tool for blackmailing or a tool for advertising. This is something we should all avoid to do if we want to be credible journalists.
This might not seem to be a real code of ethics, but I think this is what we should think about when we are out there in the field conducting an interview. I often feel a bit uncomfortable asking people "the tough question", or about their personal life, which can be important to the story. But the "moral" side of me always stops me from doing that. I would think this might not be an ethical thing to do prying into the private life of people. But as this code suggested, we sometimes have to cross certain boundaries we don't cross outside the journalistic situation.
I enjoy reading a well written travel story. But more and more scandals of journalists being paid by the organizers or the promoters of the trip really get me wonder "can I trust what I read?"
This code above is from NYT to their travel writers. It all seems reasonable when we read it. But nowadays, the expenses of trips are more often than not much higher than what journalists are paid by the newspaper. And offers from travel agencies and tourist destinations keep arriving at the journalist's mailbox. In this situation, I really can't help but asking "does the rule still apply?"
5. Don't be a jerk.
Simple, and to the point. I really like my professor Jay Rosen's summarization of press ethics. No matter how much we talk about press ethics, you would still break it if you don't think twice before you do anything. I mean, the ethics are simple to understand, and to follow that, you just need to remember to ask yourself "am I doing the right thing?"
No comments:
Post a Comment