Over the summer two journalists illegally entered Lebanon to get a better sense of how the people felt about the war and what was actually going on in the country. This was an ethically illegal maneuver and the journalists were only concerned with producing a good story. The reason this was so frowned upon was because the writers were endangering the lives of the citizens making this an unethical matter. This broke the laws of the country, falsely entered the country which is fabricating the truth, and jeopardizing the lives of the people they came into contact with during the duration of their stay. There is a thin line between going too far and ruining a journalists credibility or going just far enough for a story. These two journalists clearly went too far and were not thinking ethically, which is the number one rule of journalism. Also, they could have died but many innocent citizens who had no idea these men were not being truthful about their stay in the country could have died. Journalists need to remember their limits and keep in mind that they can destroy the lives of others over a story that is not dire to their, or many others, own lives.
The Daily Star
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I agree that this is unethical. I agree that there is a fine line and these reporters indefintely crossed that line. By entering an area illegally and endangering lives, they were being unethical. It is important to respect privacy when covering a story and using good judgment. These reporters did neither and in turn did more harm in trying to cover this story and effectiveness.
I partially agree that this is unethical. I believe that it was wrong for the reporters to put the others in danger by coming into their country illegally. Although I feel it is wrong, I also feel that if the information they gavered was vital in helping the circumstances then it was necessary.
I am torn! Apart of me feels that is was unethical. It is a problem when a reporter put others in danger merely to gather a story. However, I do feel that sometimes journalist have to take the creative route to uncover the truth. Shedding light to certain problems may put a journalist in a sticky situation. In order to give a voice to the voiceless, a journalist may struggle with choosing between what is right and what is wrong.
I originally posted my comment stating that I did not believe the act was ethical. But after speaking with the professor and the class, I have changed my views. I believe that sometimes it is neccessary to bend the rules or laws to get the real story when it benefits the people. If the country knew that there were journalists coming in to find out about what was going on, they would not get the entire truth of the event. It is easy to put on a front when you are expecting someone to come and interview. In this case I believe they worked to respect privacy and in the end did what they had to do in order to help the country and protect the people.
I agree that this issue is unethical. It is the journalists job to tell the truth but not fabricate it. I think it is wrong that they went to another country we are at war with. It is also very unethical that they lied in the material itself. I dont want to read a story and make my own assumptions for already wrong information. The was is sticky enough as it is. Why are journalists making lies to make it harder than it already is?
Post a Comment