In response to the blog "Reporter Leaves NBC 5 amid Stebic Controversy" its believed that a female reporter was involved in foul play. Apparently she went to a suspects house who was still under investigation for the disapperance of his missing wife.
This is obiously a wrong doing by the reporter. It doesn't matter if there was foul play or not, it's simply a conflict of interest as stated in the blog. She shouldn't have been over there meddleing with someone who was in the public eye in a negative way. It makes the reporter look bad, and more importantly the news station for whom she works. It is definatly unethical and if I were her boss I would have let her go too. The breaking news put some kind of a strain on the station. They were left no choice but to fire her because the company didn't want their name tarnished.
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Reporter Leaves NBC 5 amid Stebic Controversy
By: Tim Wheeler: September 20 2007
A story involving a Chicago reporter’s seemingly unethical visit to a suspect in a disappearance case’s house drew critical media attention in mid July. Amy Jacobson was caught on video at the home of Craig Stebic, whose wife recently disappeared, dressed in a bikini top and beach towel. Since the leak of the video Jacobson has received a significant amount of negative media attention regarding her ethical conduct. After a short time Jacobson’s resignation was received and she is no longer a member of the channel 5 NBC news team of which she was previously employed.
Whether or not foul play was involved or not Jacobson had no business, as a distinguished reporter, socially meeting with a suspect of an ongoing investigation. The argument can be made that Stebic and Jacobson had developed a relationship, but this argument is overshadowed by the idea that the scene is a primary example of a conflict of interest. In Jacobson’s case she is caught on video meddling in the like likes of an open and serious investigation. An action like this not only damages the credibility of Amy Jacobson as a reporter but casts a negative light on WMAQ-TV channel five news as an organization.
A story involving a Chicago reporter’s seemingly unethical visit to a suspect in a disappearance case’s house drew critical media attention in mid July. Amy Jacobson was caught on video at the home of Craig Stebic, whose wife recently disappeared, dressed in a bikini top and beach towel. Since the leak of the video Jacobson has received a significant amount of negative media attention regarding her ethical conduct. After a short time Jacobson’s resignation was received and she is no longer a member of the channel 5 NBC news team of which she was previously employed.
Whether or not foul play was involved or not Jacobson had no business, as a distinguished reporter, socially meeting with a suspect of an ongoing investigation. The argument can be made that Stebic and Jacobson had developed a relationship, but this argument is overshadowed by the idea that the scene is a primary example of a conflict of interest. In Jacobson’s case she is caught on video meddling in the like likes of an open and serious investigation. An action like this not only damages the credibility of Amy Jacobson as a reporter but casts a negative light on WMAQ-TV channel five news as an organization.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
A Newspaper Defends Naming Jurors
By: Jo Blaine: September 19, 2007
This New York Times article reports a conflict over a recent Connecticut newspaper's front page publication that identified jurors on a high profile murder case. Unless judges specifically order that jurors' identifications be withheld, no law prohibits making the information public. The judge in the reported case did not specify that jurors' anonymity be protected. Those on the Connecticut newspaper's staff responsible for the published information claim each juror understood what the article's drift would be.
Since the publication, one juror and one alternate have been excused after expressing concern for their safety. The New York Times reports that reason for such concern may be validated by the nature of the murder case. The jury must decide whether to sentence the defendant to life in prison or to death by lethal injection.
The possibility of passionate responses by members of the public combined with information exposing the jurors to that public drives the criticism of the Connecticut newspaper's conduct.
The defendant's lawyer, journalism professors, involved jurors, and now, even the newspaper's editor understand the better choice would have been to shield the jurors from the public, regardless of the legal green light to do otherwise.
A scenerio like this poses good question(s) for those entering the journalism field as there may be times when we'll have to gauge the appropriateness of releasing certain information. Even when our sources have given their permission, even when the law technically allows it, we have a responsibility to use discretion by considering probable dynamics that could be set in play by publicizing the information. Like the mental rule concerning plagiarism that suggests 'when in doubt, leave it out,' perhaps it's wise to exercise the same caution before reporting questionably sensitive information. The main question is: Is it worth it? If it's unethical, then by definition it should not be worth it to a news reporter. Potentially endangering others is an unethical move if made willingly. While your information might really add to the substance in your story, the downside could be more profound. Another question is how you might use the information alternately in a professionally ethical manner. The scenerio with the Connecticut paper allows for some creativity in understanding what alternatives might be. The names, hometowns and occupations of the jurors were shared. As suggested by a journalism professor referenced in the article, describing the jurors from a standpoint that preserves their anonymity but allows the public some general insight into the demographics of the jury is a possible way to use the information.
This New York Times article reports a conflict over a recent Connecticut newspaper's front page publication that identified jurors on a high profile murder case. Unless judges specifically order that jurors' identifications be withheld, no law prohibits making the information public. The judge in the reported case did not specify that jurors' anonymity be protected. Those on the Connecticut newspaper's staff responsible for the published information claim each juror understood what the article's drift would be.
Since the publication, one juror and one alternate have been excused after expressing concern for their safety. The New York Times reports that reason for such concern may be validated by the nature of the murder case. The jury must decide whether to sentence the defendant to life in prison or to death by lethal injection.
The possibility of passionate responses by members of the public combined with information exposing the jurors to that public drives the criticism of the Connecticut newspaper's conduct.
The defendant's lawyer, journalism professors, involved jurors, and now, even the newspaper's editor understand the better choice would have been to shield the jurors from the public, regardless of the legal green light to do otherwise.
A scenerio like this poses good question(s) for those entering the journalism field as there may be times when we'll have to gauge the appropriateness of releasing certain information. Even when our sources have given their permission, even when the law technically allows it, we have a responsibility to use discretion by considering probable dynamics that could be set in play by publicizing the information. Like the mental rule concerning plagiarism that suggests 'when in doubt, leave it out,' perhaps it's wise to exercise the same caution before reporting questionably sensitive information. The main question is: Is it worth it? If it's unethical, then by definition it should not be worth it to a news reporter. Potentially endangering others is an unethical move if made willingly. While your information might really add to the substance in your story, the downside could be more profound. Another question is how you might use the information alternately in a professionally ethical manner. The scenerio with the Connecticut paper allows for some creativity in understanding what alternatives might be. The names, hometowns and occupations of the jurors were shared. As suggested by a journalism professor referenced in the article, describing the jurors from a standpoint that preserves their anonymity but allows the public some general insight into the demographics of the jury is a possible way to use the information.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
MEDIA SKIRMISH
This article in the Sacramento Bee is about the alleged theft of two free Natomas Publications (Natomas Journal and N Magazines) by members of their respective staff. The Natomas Journal publisher Will Craig was caught on videotape picking up a stack of N magazines discarding them and replacing them with the Natomas Journal. Allegedly Craig has done this more than once and although there is a video of a man disregarding and replacing the N magazines a second time he face is concealed from the camera. Craig said he was responsible once but that the second time it wasn't him. He also said that he did it because he someone from the N magazine staff has been stripping the Natomas Journal racks for 21 months and he wanted to send a message. He claims the theft of their papers stopped 24 after he replaced and discarded the N magazine. The law in California prohibits taking more that 25 copies of a freely distributed paper to sell, barter, recycle for cash, harm a competitor, or deprive others of the enjoyment to read.I think that this story shows why the journalism community is not respected. I have read both publications and its inconceivable to think that either staff members would stoop to stealing papers. If they don't have the integrity not to steal how can you trust that their publications have integrity in the stories they write. The publisher from the Natomas Journal said he suspected his papers were being stolen my question is why didn't he take it the police? All in all,I was very disappointed in his response to accusations of stealing it shouldn't have mattered what his suspected his competitors of . Integrity, in my opinion should be the ethic that a journalist should value the most.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Ethics of News: Tuesday September 18
University, Professor named in lawsuit
The State Hornet
By: Hillary Geiger: September 18, 2007
This story is about the lawsuit filed by Judy Aguilar against Professor Wilfrido Corral and the University. Aguilar claims to have been sexually harassed by Corral beginning in the fall of 2005. Aguilar also claims that the California State University Board of Trustees did not take action to prevent this harassment. This is not the only time this has happened. Another student came forward and claimed to have been asked out several times by Corral in March of 2006. If found guilty, Corral will receive a punishment ranging from a counseling memo to a dismissal.
Corral went against University policy. I can feel no remorse for him on the media attention he has received. This incident should not have even occurred in the first place. Not only did Corral go against simple ethics, but he created an unsafe environment for students. It strictly states in the California State University, Sacramento Policy on Sexual Harassment that professors cannot date or engage in sexual affairs with students who are enrolled in their classes. I do not feel that the paper broke ethical rules. The point is that a well known professor broke a vital ethical rule. Those who have all the power use it on those who have none in the situation. That is unethical.
The State Hornet
By: Hillary Geiger: September 18, 2007
This story is about the lawsuit filed by Judy Aguilar against Professor Wilfrido Corral and the University. Aguilar claims to have been sexually harassed by Corral beginning in the fall of 2005. Aguilar also claims that the California State University Board of Trustees did not take action to prevent this harassment. This is not the only time this has happened. Another student came forward and claimed to have been asked out several times by Corral in March of 2006. If found guilty, Corral will receive a punishment ranging from a counseling memo to a dismissal.
Corral went against University policy. I can feel no remorse for him on the media attention he has received. This incident should not have even occurred in the first place. Not only did Corral go against simple ethics, but he created an unsafe environment for students. It strictly states in the California State University, Sacramento Policy on Sexual Harassment that professors cannot date or engage in sexual affairs with students who are enrolled in their classes. I do not feel that the paper broke ethical rules. The point is that a well known professor broke a vital ethical rule. Those who have all the power use it on those who have none in the situation. That is unethical.
Sunday, September 16, 2007
Ethics of News: Monday September 17
The Public Editor: Of snakes, nudity, and the varied tastes of readers
The Sacramento Bee
By Allison McCurdy: September 17, 2007
The article discusses recent outrage over the print of a near-naked woman's body in the "Names and Faces" section of the Sacramento Bee. The picture was of a nude Mary-Louise Parker only covered by a snake. The picture served as publicity for the third season of Parker's comedy series called "Weeds." There was a large volume of complaints that the picture was offensive and demeaning to women. The first round of complaints sparked a backlash from other readers. V. Venable, a female reader, emailed to say: "I am in my 70s and I find it rather surprising anyone would find the image offensive in this day and age." Armondo Acuna, author of the article, speaks of ethics and audience. He justifies the publication of the picture, because the last time the Bee published a near-naked picture was of a pregnant Demi Moore in 1991. He also says that journalists struggle to engage younger generations of readers. If they do not make the news interesting and eye-catching, they will loose their audience to online sources like Google and Youtube.
The article examines the ethics of news and how important it is to understand ones' audience. The controversy over the publication of a near-naked woman illustrates the differing views of what readers deem "printable." This article made me realize how important it is to exercise ethics when choosing printable news. I further understand how journalists need to be sensitive to their audiences. Personally, I do not think the Bee crossed any line by printing the picture. If it had been in the front section, the Bee could stand to loose some "serious news" credibility. However, it was on the back of the Scene section and intended to advertise a TV show. Furthermore, it was not explicit; Parker's body parts were covered. The public is subjected to more provocative visuals by Victoria's Secret ads on public television.
The Sacramento Bee
By Allison McCurdy: September 17, 2007
The article discusses recent outrage over the print of a near-naked woman's body in the "Names and Faces" section of the Sacramento Bee. The picture was of a nude Mary-Louise Parker only covered by a snake. The picture served as publicity for the third season of Parker's comedy series called "Weeds." There was a large volume of complaints that the picture was offensive and demeaning to women. The first round of complaints sparked a backlash from other readers. V. Venable, a female reader, emailed to say: "I am in my 70s and I find it rather surprising anyone would find the image offensive in this day and age." Armondo Acuna, author of the article, speaks of ethics and audience. He justifies the publication of the picture, because the last time the Bee published a near-naked picture was of a pregnant Demi Moore in 1991. He also says that journalists struggle to engage younger generations of readers. If they do not make the news interesting and eye-catching, they will loose their audience to online sources like Google and Youtube.
The article examines the ethics of news and how important it is to understand ones' audience. The controversy over the publication of a near-naked woman illustrates the differing views of what readers deem "printable." This article made me realize how important it is to exercise ethics when choosing printable news. I further understand how journalists need to be sensitive to their audiences. Personally, I do not think the Bee crossed any line by printing the picture. If it had been in the front section, the Bee could stand to loose some "serious news" credibility. However, it was on the back of the Scene section and intended to advertise a TV show. Furthermore, it was not explicit; Parker's body parts were covered. The public is subjected to more provocative visuals by Victoria's Secret ads on public television.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
