Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

159753

Regulars
  • Posts

    10
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Previous Fields

  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Country
    Not Specified
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

159753's Achievements

Novice

Novice (2/7)

0

Reputation

  1. Sorry again, here's the paper in its entirety. Ethics and Journalism Ethics and journalism is a confusing topic. When it comes to journalism, what are the standards a journalist ought to follow and why? I really have absolutely no idea. I would first have to know what a journalist is before I could prescribe any sort of ethical standard. According to dictionary.com, journalism is "The collecting, writing, editing, and presenting of news or news articles in newspapers and magazines and in radio and television broadcasts." This definition gives us no insight of how a journalist ought to act; it merely tells us what a journalist does. Should the journalist collect, write, and edit news truthfully? Or should the journalist collect, write, and edit news according to whatever his fancy may be? The definition gives us no prescription. Nevertheless, just as a business should seek the greatest profit it can, so should journalism. What this means is that the ethics of journalism (i.e., the code of values journalism accepts to guide its choices and actions) are dictated by what is most profitable. All businesses, including journalism, will go bankrupt if they do not make a profit. Thus, journalism should be intimately concerned with making a profit. The best way to make a profit is to give the people what they want. If, in regards to journalism, people seek the truth, then the truth will sell and be profitable. If what they want is truth but are instead given a complex interwoven web of truth and falsehood, then the journalist has failed and will soon go out of business (see Shattered Glass for evidence). Thus, the code of values journalism should accept to guide its choices and actions is that code which is best governed by profit. The ethical journalist, then, is one who views profit as an absolute necessity. The unethical journalist is one who completely disregards profit. (If this isn't convincing, imagine what would happen to journalism if it wasn't profitable.) To put theory into practice, you may observe Stephen Glass in the film, Shattered Glass. Were his choices and actions ethical? No. The reason they were not ethical was because The New Republic portrayed itself as a truthful newspaper--a newspaper dedicated to reporting the truth. Stephen Glass, however, did not report the truth; rather, he fabricated sensational stories. This isn't what The New Republic stood for, nor what its readers wanted. Therefore, Glass acted very unethically. (And as I'm sure, after Glass' fabrications were revealed, the newspaper must have suffered financial losses. . .so much for the alleged dichotomy b/t the moral and the practical!) If I were a journalist, I would follow my ethical guidelines described above. Whatever would earn me the most profit would serve as my standard of value. So in other words, if the question was: would I support the truth? My ethical answer would be: only if the truth was in support of profit. END Thoughts? I'm not sure if my reasoning is correct. I know it's important to look at the nature of the subject when prescribing ethical standards--so that is what I thought I did in this article. I looked at the nature of journalism and then prescribed profit as its standard of value. When I think about it further, though, I don't think I asked the question, "And just exactly what entity lies under journalism?" Anyhow, I'm confused.
  2. Argh! That's bizarre--I did type the whole thing out and could have sworn it was posted. Thanks for both your comments. . . I'll post the entire article later.
  3. Context: I'm taking a journalism class and we were assigned to write a short paper regarding journalism and ethics. We were suppose to answer such questions as, "What makes for good journalism?" "What standards should journalism follow?" "If you were a journalist, which standards would you follow?" Here's my short paper. . .I would appreciate any feedback regarding my arguments and the teacher's comments. Here's it is: New Republic stood for, nor what its readers wanted. Therefore, Glass acted very unethically. (And as I'm sure, after Glass' fabrications were revealed, the newspaper must have suffered financial losses. . .so much for the alleged dichotomy between the moral and the practical!) If I were a journalist, I would follow my ethical guidelines described above. Whatever would earn me the most profit would serve as my standard of value. So in other words, if the question was: would I support the truth? My ethical answer would be: only if the truth is in support of profit. END Here is what my teacher wrote for comments on my paper: Very logical and true, but consider a deeper motivation than making a profit. What if telling lies makes more money? Is it OK then? Consider the tabloid magazines. There has to be more to being a journalist than profit. Most journalists don't go into it to make money. They have varied motivations, but one of the foundations among many is the desire to help people know and understand what's going on in the world and how it relates to their lives. This is what I hoped you would have gleaned from Nachtway's example. [to the readers of this forum, if I remember correctly, Nachtway is a war photographer] --You have an interesting argument here--certainly news outlets ultimately lose money if they tell lies or half-truths. But is profit the only ultimate end? If so, then tabloid magazines are justified in what they do. Yet, something in us cringes when we see their far-fetched headlines. . .and something in us is drawn to their unbelievable stories about celebrities' lives. Why? Because we'd like to think what we're reading is true, even though we know at some level it's likely not true. Is it OK, then, to tell lies about real people--I'm not talking about fictional characters and their stories in novels--because, who cares? The publication is making money, and that's what poeple want--it's what they are buying, after all? I just think your argument doesn't hold true across the board of everything out there that calls itself journalism. End of Teacher's Comments. Once, again, I'd appreciate any feedback. [and PS. . .this isn't the account I normally use on this forum; I'm just trying to maintain some anonymity]
  4. I loved it too! Thank you for sharing, and I look forward to your next opus!
  5. Now that's ^ ^funny. I found those two icons, in conjuction with what JRS said, to be hilarious. It's probably just me, but the contrast between those two expressions, when juxtaposed, is funny as hell. (I guess because I understand what it means to hide one's deepest emotion by laughter) Since jrs didn't substantiate his view point, I'll take a shot at it. There's a famous quote that goes something like: "there are some things in life so serious you can only laugh at them." I think that quote expresses the heart of what jrs was saying. Often times a comedian will point out something so ludicrous, so debasedly immoral, that you must laugh at how pathetic it is. This might be a poor illustrative example of the above, but say you were to go out hunting, and before crossing into hunting territory, a sign said: WARNING: Dick Chenney is hunting. At first I would laugh at this, but upon reflection, I might not find it so funny because I am laughing at the fact that a man was shot due to Chenney's negligence. ````````````````````````` Also, someone mentioned about laughing at jokes that were anti-capitalism. I am able to laugh at those jokes too, but only because I know the commedian, within the context of his knowledge, merely misunderstands capitalism and hasn't given it the thought it deserves. (I had a radical leftist professor in college who'd make anti-greed marks. I'd laugh at them only because I knew her sense of life was equivalent to mine---and in most cases, I'd say her explicit views contradicted the moral essence of her character. Thus I'd laugh at the majority of her jokes. Originally, however, I didn't, because I didn't know her well enough to understand the context in which she spoke.) p.s. Schefflera's post was a great use of irony! Irony is always funny! =P
  6. I'm fairly sure my 19 year old brother has aspergers. . .if that is the case with your sister, maybe we can hook them up A lot of the things you listed, steff, seem symptomatic of aspergers. Things like avoiding eye contact, difficulty expressing feelings, not empathetic, etc. are all characteristic of that mental disorder. How about a little more information though? What's her social life like? How old is she? Does she ever ask questions about your day, how it went, how you are, etc.? Does she have odd, highly repetitive habits, like twirling a coat hanger, or flapping her hand back and forth? Is she monomanically obsessed with anything? Does she routinely mimic the behaviors and facial expressions of others in an attempt to fit in?
  7. I'm 21 and am a sophmore in college. I pay for everything (health/car insurance, gasoline, food, clothes, utilities, water bill) save my tuition and housing, and consider myself spoiled. My parents are fine paying for my housing and tuition, yet I feel guilty because of it. At 21, I feel like I am a financial burden to my parents and do not think they should have to fork out any more money. The college I attend is inexpensive, roughly $3,000/year for 30 credits. Nevertheless, that's $9,000 out of my parents pocket to continue my education. Knowing that I probably don't make $9,000/yr myself, it kills me to think of my parents paying for my tuition. I'd like to be working 40hrs/wk at $10.00/hr somewhere, and 20hrs/wk while I take 15 credits at my school. But the problem is, I can't seem to find a job. I've applied to numerous places and none of them have expressed any interest in me. There's nothing wrong with me, nothing that would turn away an employer. I don't have a lot of previous work experience, but I attend my classes on time and didn't miss one class last semester or the semester before it. Furthermore, my background check comes up clean and has no traffic violations whatsoever. I am reliable, responsible, and capable of learning and doing mundane tasks, yet I can't seem to get a response from any employer. Work study isn't available to me because my FASFA form says I don't deserve it. Regardless, I don't want to be a parasite of my parents any longer, and part of me wonders if it would be wiser to not get a job at all and take out loans to pay for my living expenses, that way I am no burden to my parents. Futhermore, my ultimate goal is to become an attorney, but I don't see how, besides the measely income I might be receiving, flipping burgers, waiting tables, or filing crap helps achieve that goal. I'd much rather philosophize, study Objectivism, and write editorials/journalistic entries for $0/month than be making $1200/month. Is my thinking wrong, however? I'm not really sure what to do.
  8. I agree with you, Maarten. If the end you are seeking requires irrational means, then I can only hope your vision of the end is passionate enough to overcome those means. Visualize yourself basking in those ends and that may motivate you.
×
×
  • Create New...