JOUR 300/0301: Journalism Ethics

Fall 2005

Tuesdays & Thursdays: 2:00-3:15

TWS 2212

http://www.ajglass.com

Andy Glass

   Home: 202.363.2389 |  Cell:  202.841.3829

mailto:aglass@jmail.umd.edu

15 weeks

While I have no campus office, I will be available by appointment.

 

27 sessions


"To be a journalist, ethics must be a part of you -- not a page in a book or framed parchment on a wall."

 (--Gerald M. Sass, The Freedom Forum)

 

INTRODUCTION: The chief purpose of gathering and distributing news and opinion is to serve the public welfare by informing  people and enabling them to make judgments on the major issues of our times. Journalists who abuse the power of their special role in our society for selfish motives or unworthy purposes are faithless to that public trust. The Founding Fathers adopted the First Amendment to permit the press to bring an independent scrutiny to bear on powerful forces in our complex and diverse society. That privileged role has come under closer examination, both within and outside the craft. At the same time, government at all levels has tended to become more manipulative and more secretive – even as more readers and viewers hold the media, as a Hollywood mogul once said of an badly behaved actress, “in minimum high regard.” So we swim in rough waters. Quite likely, this course will not enable you to reverse those tides. I hope, however, our work together will help you to better navigate through them. So welcome to Journalism Ethics 300,  a course that will examine the process of decision-making, both good and bad, in the media and the principles on which those decisions are based. We will look at what a journalist has a right to do. But we will also look at what is right to do. We will review cases where someone has done something wrong, broken a rule or ignored a standard - and in the process has hurt people and our craft. But we will add to that how to go about fostering a climate that yields good journalism based on sound and lasting principles.

 

You should view JOUR 300 as an opportunity to develop your own ideas about the role of the press in society, sensitive diversity issues and your own future role in the craft, How diligent are you going to be in pursuing the highest ethical standards?  What pitfalls may await you in the demanding workplace that you are likely to enter after graduating?

AND NOW AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE FROM YOUR SPONSOR … Along with certain rights, UMD students have the responsibility to behave honorably in an academic environment. Academic dishonesty, including cheating, fabrication, facilitating academic dishonesty and plagiarism, will not be tolerated. Adhering to a high ethical standard is of special importance in the world of journalism, where reliability and credibility are the cornerstones of the field. Therefore, our university has adopted a zero tolerance policy toward academic dishonesty. Any abridgment of the university’s academic integrity standards in a College of Journalism course will be referred directly to the dean. The dean will send all confirmed cases to the university's Office of Judicial Affairs with a recommendation of expulsion from the university for any violation of the code. To insure this is understood, as you know, all UMD students are required to sign an academic integrity pledge at the beginning of the semester. It will cover all assignments in this course.

WHAT YOU CAN EXPECT:  Journalism at its best demands the highest of standards. In this course, you will be expected to meet those standards. I hope you will find doing so brings you sense of accomplishment and helps prepare you for a successful career. Through course readings, assignments and class participation, you should be able to acquire the needed tools to identify and analyze ethical issues. This includes:

  • An understanding of the underlying ethical theories and guiding principles that apply to journalism.
  • An ability to apply various decision-making strategies to ethical problems.
  • A knowledge of the ethical norms of journalism.
  • The application of ethical standards to real-world situations.

 

 

Since the bulk of the learning experience for this course will be in class, it is necessary that you be here, on time, to join actively in class discussions. Mere absorption doesn’t cut it. Some of our class work will be done in small groups. Unexcused absences, tardy arrivals and a generally passive attitude will be unfavorably reflected in your final grade.

Students with a specific disability (permanent or temporary, physical or learning) who need special accommodations during the semester should meet with me.

There will be an open-book mid-term exam based on a case study reviewed in the official course text. You also be asked to do a considerable, but not excessive, amount of writing, including up to four ethics memos analyzing of current news stories and media programming; an open-book commentary on a case study that will serve as a mid-term exam; a group writing/editing project and a final research paper. (A key part of ethical decision-making is demonstrating your ability to articulate your reasoning in strong expository English sentences.)

Your ethics memos will discuss a specific case that relates to one or another of the classroom lessons we will be considering over the course of the semester. Two of the four will be formal papers. (They could emanate from case studies to be found in the textbook.)  The remaining two should be derived from an issue you have found outside class, either from reading The Washington Post or from a scan of a journalism-related journalism websites. If you have a problem with finding a suitable off-syllabus case, you should see me; I should be able to suggest one.

Should you decide to create your own scenario, bear in mind that choosing an altogether obvious predicament, such as an open-and-shut case of outright plagiarism, may not best illustrate your ability to think through the kind of complex situations that are likely to lead to a good grade. You should write your memo as if you are a  line editor at a news organization who is advising your boss on the scope of the problem and (a) proposed solution(s). The assignments are meant to grasp your ability to examine complex situations, offer useful alternatives and recommendations, such as the pros and cons of a potential course of action. Here are some “talking points’ you might consider:

·         A need to make a lucid exposition of the facts.

·         A brief description of the ethical challenges or values at stake.

·         A description of possible actions and alternatives and their likely consequences.

·         A final resolution of the issue(s).

In the remaining two informal ethics essays, you should adopt the role of an ombudsman for the Washington Post or an online blogger.  In either case, you are to assume that you are writing for publication to a wide audience.

Alternatively, you may substitute for one of the informal ethics essays, a movie review after having watched one of the following three films:

  • Absence of Malice (1981).
  • All the President’s Men (1976).
  • Shattered Glass (2003) (no relation).

Pay special heed in your review to the ethical issues raised in the movie you have chosen to review.

Each of your four memos/stories/review should be about 600 words in length.  Please submit them in printed form in two double-spaced pages.

There will also be one three-member group project based on the same criteria as I’ve outlined above. The project will consist of (a) an ethics memo along the same lines as your two individual efforts, (b) a response memo from your “supervisor” and (c) an analysis by the “top editor.” Your should form your own working groups or see me if you have a problem in finding working partners. You may collaborate freely within your own  group after deciding on your individual roles when editing each part of this this three-part assignment before it is turned in -- but please refrain from working with other teams. Your grade for this particular exercise will be a collective one. (This exercise is meant to illustrate the real-world nature of what occurs when sensitive ethics dilemmas arise in a newsroom.)

 

 

You will write a final paper in lieu of a final exam. You should submit your topic for my approval no later than November 3rd. It is most advisable not to wait until the absolute deadline in thinking through the dimensions of your paper. It should deal with a significant problem or trend in journalistic ethics. It should encompass original research and reporting, although well-sourced derivative material is acceptable to buttress your work. Your paper, which is due on the last day of class, should be about 8 to 10 pages long, not including footnotes, source notes and the bibliography.

TO SUCCEED IN THIS CLASS:

  • Do all the required readings. Come to class prepared to discuss your work.
  • Begin now to consider topics, sources, organization, approaches to assignments, especially your final paper.
  • Don't wait until the last minute to complete your assignments. Give yourself plenty time to think, draft, self-edit, redraft.
  • Don't be shy. If you have a question, concern, suggestion or a criticism, share it with me before, during or after class.

TEXT AND READING MATERIALS:

  • Media Ethics: Issues & Cases (5th ed.) by Phillip Patterson and Lee Wilkins (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 2005)
  • A Beautiful Mind: The Life of Mathematical Genius and Nobel Laureate John Nash by Sylvia Nash (Paperback 1998).
  • Daily reading of The Washington Post trolling for ethical issues. You may find additional grist for your mill in online editions of The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and (perhaps via Lexis-Nexis) The Wall Street Journal. (Media stories often appear in the Times’ Monday Business Section.)
  • Check-in daily at the Poynter website. Material from Poynter and its resident scholars and writers will be an important element in nearly every session of this course. Once at the Poynter site,  review both the ethics and Romenesko links. 

Additional website checklist:

  • The American Journalism Review.
  • Columbia Journalism Review.
  • PBS NewsHour’s Mediawatch.
  • American Society of Newspaper Editors.
  • The Project for Excellence in Journalism.
  • Online Journalism Review.
  • The Society of Professional Journalists.
  • Google News (Journalism Ethics).

YOUR GRADE IN THIS COURSE WILL BE BASED ON:

·         Class participation                                (15%)

·         Writing assignments             (35%)

·         Midterm exam                        (10%)

·         Final paper                              (40%)

PERSONAL NOTE: Since this is the first time I will be teaching this course, I have relied  heavily, with permission, on the  concepts and syllabi prepared for prior semesters by Professors Tony Barbieri, Chris Hanson, Blake Morrison and Diana Huffman.  I am particularly indebted to Tony Barbieri for sharing with me his first-rate reading list and excellent handout materials. While I intend to make every effort to follow the syllabus below, I reserve the right to institute mid-course changes, if needed, to reflect (a) breaking developments or (b) the needs and/or expertise of our yet to be confirmed invited guest lecturers.

 

 

WEEK 01 – SESSION 01 (Thursday, September 1st)

UNIT PROLOGUE: This class will serve as an introduction of the instructor to the students and the other way around. We will have a general discussion of assignments and readings as well as my expectations and approach to grades. We will outline the structure of the course as reflected in this syllabus. We will review the important role of rotating student discussion leaders in class. We will focus on why ethical issues matter and on the difficulties and ambiguities posed by some ethics-related issues.

Essay Assignment 1:  Write an autobiographical sketch that gives me a sense of your personal background and your professional and intellectual interests and plans. Cite any work or courses you may have already taken that you believe might be valuable to you in undertaking the issues we will be discussing in JOUR 300. (Your essay will not be shared with the class.) (500-600 words). (Due at Session 2.)

WEEK 02 – SESSION 02 (Tuesday, September 6th)

UNIT OVERVIEW: Over two sessions, we will discuss various ethical models; the difference between law and ethics; between morality and ethics. We will talk about various codes of ethics and the tools required to make good decisions. We will review in general terms journalistic misconduct of both a major and minor nature. W will touch on plagiarism and other career-ending acts. We will talk about the ethical atmosphere that exist most newsrooms today, the role of competition, professional ambition and deadlines as they relate to ethical corner cutting.

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapters I and XII and:

·         Wolf in Reporter’s Clothing:

·         The Rise of Pseudo-Journalism in America. John S. Carroll, the Ruhl Lecture on Ethics delivered at the University of Oregon, May 2004. Available online, LATimes.com.

·         Guiding Principles for the Journalist (handout)

·         Bob Steele, Poynter.

·         Questions for ethical decision-making. (handout).

·         Code of Ethics, Cox Newspapers Washington Bureau (handout).

·         Code of Ethics, Society of Professional Journalists. Statement of Principles,

·         American Society of Newspaper Editors.

·         Code of Ethics, Radio Television News Directors Association.

Please turn in Essay Assignment 1 as discussed above.

Essay Assignment 2:  Write about an ethical dilemma, problem or situation that you have faced some time in your life that tested your own ethical values. Explain how you resolved it. This dilemma need not be, and probably will not be, directly connected to journalism. Do not write anything you are unwilling to share with the class. (500-600 words) (Due at Session 4.)

WEEK 02 – SESSION 03 (Thursday, September 8th)

UNIT OVERVIEW: Conclusion of this topic.

 

 

 

WEEK 03 – SESSION 04 (Tuesday, September 13th)

UNIT FAIR I: Over three sessions, we will examine various aspects regarding the critical issues of journalistic accuracy and fairness; the risks involved in using (and being used by) sources, particularly anonymous ones and the traps to avoid. (Is it ever fair or justified to “burn” anonymous sources?) We will talk about the importance to readers and viewers of knowing sources of information.

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter II: Ethical Principles and:

·         Guidelines for use of anonymous sources (handout).

·         The New York Times Guidelines on Anonymous Sources.

·         The Washington Post Policy on Sources, Quotations, Attribution and Datelines.

·         Using Anonymous Sources: Glenn Guzzo. Project for Excellence in Journalism. http://www.journalism.org/resources/tools/reporting/accuracy/guzzo.asp?from=online

·         Using Anonymous Sources, Freedom Forum http://www.journalism.org/resources/tools/reporting/accuracy/freedomforum.asp?from=online

·         Cohen v. Cowles. (handout).

Please turn in Essay Assignment 2 as discussed above.

WEEK 03 – SESSION 05 (Thursday, September 15th)

UNIT FAIR II: We will examine the 2004 CBS/Bush case and the CNN/Time Magazine Tailwind case. How similar were these cases? Were the failures ethical in nature or merely examples of bad journalism? How well or poorly did each organization utilize anonymous sources? How well or poorly did each organization handle the subsequent fallout?

Before coming to class, please read:

  • CBS and Bush’s National Guard Service. The Report of the Independent Panel, plus statements from Les Moonves and Mary Mapes. Coverage in the New York Times edition of Tuesday, Jan. 11, 2005. Also, How CBS’ Big Story Fell Apart, The Los Angeles Times, Sunday, January 16, 2005.
  • An Ill Tailwind, American Journalism Review, Sept. 1998
  • Ten Mistakes That Led to the Great Fiasco, Columbia Journalism Review, Sept.-Oct. 1998.

WEEK 04 – SESSION 06 (Tuesday, September 20th)

UNIT FAIR III: We will examine the New York Times’ coverage of two controversial stories – the (ultimately scuttled) espionage case against the Chinese-born Los Alamos scientist Wen Ho Lee and the presence or absence of weapons of mass destruction in Saddam’s Iraq. Both cases led to the publication of extraordinary editors notes in the Times. Were the reporters and the newspaper improperly used by their sources? Are these valid examples of faulty journalism and/or faulty ethics?

Before coming to class, please read:

  • Covering Wen Ho Lee, NewsHour Transcript, Sept. 26, 2000.
  • Rush to Judgment, American Journalism Review, November 2000.
  • Editors’ Note on Wen Ho Lee case, The New York Times, Sept. 26, 2000.
  • Miller Brouhaha, American Journalism Review, Aug/Sept. 2003.
  • How Chalabi Played the Press, Columbia Journalism Review, July-August 2004.
  • Flawed Reporting, NewsHour Transcript, May 26, 2004.
  • Editors Note on Reporting on Iraq WMD, The New York Times, May 26, 2004.

 

Please turn in your first formal ethics memo as discussed above.

WEEK 04 – SESSION 07 (Thursday, September 22nd)

UNIT DECEPTION:  We will discuss the ethics of working undercover, lying, misrepresenting oneself, breaking the law or otherwise bearing false witness or cheating in pursuit of a story.

Before coming to class, please read:

  • Guidelines for Undercover or Hidden camera reporting (handout).
  • High Standards for Hidden Cameras, Bob Steele, Poynter, 1998.
  • Damning Undercover Tactics as “Fraud”: Can reporters lie about who they are? Columbia Journalism Review, March-April 1997.
  • Editors Hear Roar of Food Lion Case, ASNE Archive, 1/1/97.
  • ABC and Food Lion, the ethics questions. Bob Steele, Poynter, 4/1/97.
  • Bitter Fruit: How the Cincinnati Enquirer's hard-hitting Investigation of Chiquita Brands unraveled. American Journalism Review, September 1998.

WEEK 05 – SESSION 08 (Tuesday, September 27th)

UNIT PRIVACY I: In this session, we will examine one of the most enduring controversies in American newsrooms: the naming of victims of sexual assault or those who accuse others of the crime. Should editors never use a name, or only with permission of the victim? If the decision should be left to the victim in a sexual assault case, why not in other crimes? What special issues – celebrity, race, gender – were raised by the Kobe Bryant case? There is less controversy over protecting the identities of children in news stories. But what about juveniles charged with notorious crimes as adults? What about parents or guardians who permit naming or photographing of their children? Does the child have rights that cannot be given away by his or her parents? Who protects those rights?

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter VI: Privacy and:

  • Privacy Issues, Bob Steele, Poynter (handout).
  • The Law vs. Ethics, from Media Ethics, Issues and Cases (handout).
  • The Need for an Ethics of Privacy, from Ethics in Media Communications (handout).
  • Why we’re not naming Bryant’s accuser, Letter to Readers, The Denver Post, Oct. 15, 2004. (Denverpost.com).
  • Why paper published the name, Interview with Rocky Mountain News (Denver) editor John Temple, Poynter On-line, October 20, 2004.
  • Releasing the Name of Bryant’s Accuser Stirs Debate on Online Standards, By Marc Glaser, Online Journalism Review, July 25, 2003.
  • Moving Beyond Naming Names, Geneva Overholser, Washingtonpost.com Sept. 4, 2004.
  • Naming Rape Victims, Bob Steele, Poynter On-line, Aug. 10, 2002.
  • Identifying Juveniles, Al Tompkins, Poynter On-line, February 29, 2000.
  • Case study: Naming, then un-naming, a juvenile victim of sexual assault. Vallejo, Calif., August 2000. (handout).

Please turn in your first informal ethics essay or movie review as discussed above.

WEEK 05 – SESSION 09 (Thursday, September 29th)

UNIT PRIVACY II:  In this session, we will examine the issues surrounding public figures vs. private lives as well as those that deal with private people vs. public acts. The First Amendment and the landmark case of New York Times v. Sullivan gave news organizations the right to print or broadcast virtually anything about a public person. But is a legal right sufficient? What are the ethical issues at stake? Where should the bright lines be drawn?

 Before coming to class, please read:

  • Case study: The Governor’s Girlfriend; two newspapers, opposite conclusions. Read: Fountain of Sleaze, The Washington City Paper, Sept. 7, 2001. 
  • Case study from The Washington Post and Baltimore Sun: treatment of Glendening’s son DUI charges. handout)
  • Now His Double Affair Laid Bare, The New York Daily News, Dec. 13, 2004.
  • False Report on Clinton; Why Story Was Withdrawn, The Dallas Morning News, Feb. 1, 1998, (handout)
  • Richard Jewell and the Olympic Bombing. Ron Ostrow, Project for Excellence in Journalism. http://www.journalism.org/resources/education/case_studies/jewell.asp.
  • Into the Spotlight, American Journalism Review, November, 2002.
  • Death of a Boy, the St. Petersburg Times, June 6, 1996.
  • Grieving Over News, the Washington Post, Jan. 7 2001.
  • Relevance of a Checkered Past, Don Wycliff, the Chicago Tribune, Jan. 20, 2005.

WEEK 06 – SESSION 10 (Tuesday, October 4th)

UNIT ROLE OF THE PRESS I – CIVIC JOURNALISM: We will discuss civic journalism, often also called public journalism, which began as an effort to bridge the chasm between news organizations and their audiences. It holds that journalists should not only point out problems but also examine and offer solutions. In many cases, it advocates getting involved -- and there is where potential ethical issues may arise.

Before coming to class, please read:

  • The Role of Newspapers in Building Citizenship, Jan Schaffer, executive director of the Pew Center for Civic Journalism. Sept. 13, 2004. http://www.pewcenter.org/doingcj/speeches/s_brazil.html.
  • The Ethics of Civic Journalism – Independence as the Guide. Bob Steele, Poynter, June 1 1996.
  • Citizen Science Toolbox. http://www.coastal.crc.org.au/toolbox/details.asp?id=5.

WEEK 06 – SESSION 11 (Thursday, October 6th)

UNIT ROLE OF THE PRESS II – BEING PART OF THE STORY: We will examine what ethical and moral factors journalists should consider when the authorities ask their cooperation to either publish or withhold information. When is it acceptable to become a participant in a story, influence its course, and then cover it? Do different rules apply to news reporters, feature writers and columnists? Should journalists always try to avoid becoming the subject of a news story?

Before coming to class, please read:

  • Did the Unabomber Decision set a Precedent? American Journalism Review, November 1995.
  • “Hillbilly Armor” Protects 278th, Chattanooga Times Free Press 12/9/04. Timesfreepress.com website.
  • Reporter prompted query to Rumsfeld, Washington post.com 12/9/04.
  • Email of Chattanooga Times reporter on Rumsfeld question, Poynter, Romenesko, 12/9/04.
  • Sinclair TV reporter criticizes Kerry Broadcast, The Baltimore Sun, Oct. 18 2004.
  • Journalist finds himself on other end of news, The Baltimore Sun Oct 20, 2004.

  

WEEK 07 – SESSION 12 (Tuesday, October 11th)

UNIT ROLE OF THE PRESS III – INSTITUTIONAL & FINANCIAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST: We will examine as a case study the revelation last January that the Bush administration paid commentator Armstrong Williams to promote one of its policies.

Before coming to class, please read:

  • Commentator Paid to Push Story, The Washington Post, January 8, 2005.
  • All the President’s Newsmen, The New York Times, January 16, 2005.
  • Ad Puts Advisor’s Advice in Question. The Chicago Tribune, Dec. 26, 2004.
  • Florida TV station cashes in on Interview “Guests.” The Washington Post, Oct. 16, 2003
  • Blurring the Line Between News and Ads, The Baltimore Sun, April 5, 2000.
  • Fee Speech, By Ken Auletta, http://www.kenauletta.com/feespeech.html
  • Take the Money and Talk, American Journalism Review, June, 1999
  • Case IV-C in the textbook. (pp. 101-102.)

Please turn in your second formal ethics memo as discussed above.

WEEK 07 – SESSION 13 (Thursday, October 13th)

UNIT ROLE OF THE PRESS IV – PERSONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST:  We will examine whether journalists give up certain rights when they enter a newsroom. Where the line should be drawn between one’s professional and personal life? How deeply can an editor or reporter involve herself or himself in politics without comprising her or his journalistic role? Should a reporter or editor be to change her or his assignment because of the work or actions of a spouse?

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter IV: Loyalty and

  • Citizen Jane, The Baltimore Sun, February 25, 2001.
  • Side Job a Possible Conflict of Interest, The Baltimore Sun, Jan. 14, 2004.
  • Romancing the Source, American Journalism Review, May 2002.
  • Various newspaper and broadcast codes of ethics regarding outside activity by journalists.

Note: Your mid-term exam will be assigned at this session.

WEEK 08 – SESSION 14 (Tuesday, October 18th)

Guest Lecturer – TBA

WEEK 08 – SESSION 15 (Thursday, October 20th)

Guest Lecturer - TBA

WEEK 09 – SESSION 16 (Tuesday, October 25th)

Guest Lecturer - TBA

  

WEEK 09 – SESSION 17 (Thursday, October 27th)

UNIT: DIVERSITY: We will examine diversity and the status of minorities in American life as an issue in journalism both within and beyond the newsroom. We will look at various ethical aspects of diversity as a cornerstone of newsroom values, e.g. diversity as an accuracy issue; diversity as a fairness issue, diversity as a moral issue. We will discuss stereotyping when writing about race, gender, ethnicity or sexual orientation, the need for inclusiveness and the ethical risks of painting with too broad a brush.

Please turn in your mid-term exam.

Before coming to class, please read:

  • Report on Newsroom Diversity (summary), the Knight Foundation. May, 2004. http://powerreporting.com/knight/.
  • Guidelines for Racial Identification, Keith Woods, Poynter. (handout).
  • Tasteless or Tone Deaf, By Thomas Huang, Poynter, April 14, 2001.
  • Step Into the Minefield, By Keith Woods, Poynter, May 14, 2004.
  • Covering People with Mental and Physical Disabilities, The Whole Story, Society of Professional Journalists, March 2003. http://www.spj.org/diversity_thewhl_mar.asp.
  • Current columns in the Washington Post by William Raspberry or Eugene Robinson that deals with race-related or minority issues.

WEEK 10 – SESSION 18 (Tuesday, November 1st)

UNIT ECON: We will examine how advertisers gain influence over the media. We will discuss the problems of product placement, particularly in the movies and on television. We will review the issues involved in programming for a diverse audience in a “bottom-line” numbers-driven media climate. We will discuss how several recent circulation scandals have given the news business a black eye. We will look at Los Angeles Times and its Staples Center fiasco in 1999 as a means of focusing on the need to preserve a wall between the newsroom and the business side. We will also look at some examples where those lines are becoming blurred, especially in television and in the new media.

Before coming to both classes on this unit, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapters III & VIII: News as a Business and:

  • Blowing Up the Wall, American Journalism Review, December 1997.
  • Crossing the Line, Special Report on the LA Times and the Staples Center. December 20, 1999. The Los Angeles Times.
  • Lessons From L.A.: The Wall is Heading Back, (with The Wall: A Long History, in same issue.) The Columbia Journalism Review, Jan/Feb. 2000.
  • After the Wall, American Journalism Review, March 2000.

Please turn in your second informal ethics essay or a movie review.

WEEK 10 – SESSION 19 (Thursday, November 3rd)

This is the deadline for approval of a topic for your final paper. (Kindly submit your proposed research project to me on or before this date in a brief memo.)

UNIT ECON: Concluding review of this topic.

 

WEEK 11 – SESSION 20 (Tuesday, November 8th)

UNIT PHOTO: We will examine legal and ethical issues as they relate to photojournalism, with special emphasis on privacy; the issues raised by digital photography and the increasing ability of editors to alter journalistic art. If possible, we will have a photo editor join us for this session.

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter IX: Photo & Video Journalism

  • APME Editors Survey on Disturbing Images, Associated Press Managing Editors.
  • When to Run the Chilling Photo, Naomi Halperin, Allentown Morning Call. http://www.apphotomanagers.org/Chilling_photos.html
  • Ethics in the Age of Digital Technology, Patty Reksten, The Oregonian. http://www.apphotomanagers.org/Ethics_in%20_age.html
  • Samples of Photojournalism ethics guidelines. Project for Excellence in Journalism. http://www.journalism.org/resources/tools/ethics/codes/photojournalism.asp

WEEK 11 – SESSION 21 (Thursday, November 10th)

UNIT: PR: We will examine the relationship between the media and the public relations world with special attention to potential ethical issues.

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter V: Public Relations

Please turn in your three-person team ethics study. (For the remainder of the semester, you should be researching and drafting your final term paper.)

WEEK 12 – SESSION 22 (Tuesday, November 15th)

UNIT ONLINE: We will examine ethical behavior on the Internet. We will discuss such topics as how to follow the rules of the road on the broad information highway, search engines, online credibility, linking protocols and copyright issues. We will talk about what it means to navigate through or participate in the ever-widening blogosphere. We will try to develop some sound strategies in using the Internet as an effective reporting and editing tool. (We will try to hold this session in a wi-fi equipped lab, so if you have one, bring your laptop.)

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter X: Cyberspace

WEEK 12 – SESSION 23 (Thursday, November 17th)

UNIT ONLINE: Concluding review of this topic.

WEEK 13 – SESSION 24 (Tuesday, November 22nd)

UNIT HOLLYWOOD: We will examine when a film or TV docudrama is based on a “true story,” what obligation the filmmaker has to present an accurate portrait. We will also look at journalism as it relates to the rise of re-enacted crime shows and “reality television.”

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapter XI: Art & Entertainment and A Beautiful Mind: The Life of Mathematical Genius and Nobel Laureate John Nash by Sylvia Nash (Paperback 1998) and watch the movie by the same name (2001).

  

WEEK 14 – SESSION 25 (Tuesday, November 29th)

UNIT GOVERNMENT: We will examine the ethical issues that arise in the relationship between government and the press.

Before coming to class, please read Media Ethics (Patterson & Wilkins) Chapters VII: Media & Democracy

WEEK 14 – SESSION 26 (Thursday, December 1st)

UNIT: TASTE & SENSITIVITY: Newspapers are trying to attract younger readers; they are desperate to hold on to their core readership, people over 60. Almost every day in every newsroom in America, these two goals clash as editors decide what words and images can be shown in the newspaper or on television. We will weigh one such report that appeared last year in The Baltimore Sun.

Before coming to class, please read:

  • If I Die, The Baltimore Sun, four-part series 19-22 December, 2004. 
  • Interviewing Victims, Michigan State University Victims and the Media Program. http://www.journalism.org/resources/tools/ethics/victims/interviewing.asp?from=print
  • 4/19: Taste and Sensitivity, II. Pushing the Envelope.
  • Excerpts from Codes of Ethics dealing with Obscenity and Potentially Offensive Content. (handout)
  • Cheney Dismisses Critic with Obscenity, The Washington Post, June 25, 2004.
  • Post Editor Explains Decision to Publish Expletive, The Washington Post, June 26, 2004.

WEEK 15 – SESSION 27 (Tuesday, December 6th)

UNIT: ACCOUNTABILITY & CREDIBILITY: We will examine the problems posed when the story is ourselves. On two relatively recent occasions in the past few years, two of the nation’s most respected news organizations were forced to turn the spotlight on themselves to investigate their own journalistic misconduct and explain it the their audiences. We will discuss, compare, contrast and analyze how well they did. What can newspapers and broadcast stations do when readers call to complain? How should they correct mistakes, and y explain themselves to the public. Press councils, and why the traditional hostility and suspicion toward them in the U.S. I hope to have an ombudsman as a guest speaker.

Before coming to class, please read: 

Please turn in your final term paper.

###