According to the Society of Professional Journalist’s Code of Ethics, an aspect of ethical journalism is to “Support the open and civil exchange of view, even views they (journalists) find repugnant.” There have been many disputes over mainstream media’s adherence to this code, mainly by Donald Trump and his supporters. In the past few weeks, Trump has been arguing that mainstream media is biased against him and only reports articles that discredit his campaign. Trump had his lawyers send a letter to the New York Times (NYT) threatening to sue them if articles that were “reckless, defamatory, and constitutes libel” were not retracted. However, according to a NYT search of the biggest detriment of Clinton’s campaign in the NYT, “Clinton email,” …show more content…
These facts are overshadowed when Trump emphatically criticizes the media by saying, “I know why I get bad treatment from the New York Times. It’s because it’s owned by Mexico”. Trump’s outrageously disparaging rhetoric overwhelms the objective facts presented by liberal media outlets, painting them as biased, while distracting the populace from the accurate content presented. In order to discern impartiality, one can compare articles pertaining to similar issues from each campaign, and observe how they adhere to the ethical journalism guidelines. During this tumultuous election, there have been several incidences that challenge journalists to maintain an impartial voice. Some of these include Clinton’s misuse of a private server for government emails, and the numerous sexual assault allegations against …show more content…
In a newscast given by anchor Bret Baier (Fox News) concerning Clinton’s investigation, he says “And barring some obstruction in some way, they (FBI) believe they will continue to likely an indictment.” After that article was published, media outlets such as Cable News Network, NYT, and ABC all issued reports disputing Fox’s. Baier quickly retracted his words, saying “It was a mistake and for that I’m sorry.” However, Baier unethically reported that an indictment was likely before he any evidence to support this statement. This report prompted multitudes of outlets to publish pieces refuting the newscas. However, this did not stop Trump supports from using the chance to defame Clinton’s name. This inaccurate report allowed Trump to once again fire up his followers by saying “the FBI is investigating how Hillary Clinton put the office of Secretary of State up for sale in violation of federal law.” Enabling Trump with unverified speculation allowed him to utilise his outlandish rhetoric to twist the accusations against Clinton. What started out as a simple email investigation was transformed into a “likely indictment and the sale of the Secretary of State position”. The issue of Clinton’s email investigation was exacerbated by unethical reporting that prompted Trump’s misleading outrageous
The 2006 Duke Lacrosse Case brought to light many of the issues and divisions currently plaguing our media sphere. This terrible act of injustice, which blamed three innocent Duke lacrosse players, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, and David Evans, for the rape of an African-American stripper, garnered extensive media attention that gripped America for almost an entire year (Wasserman, 3). Today, many scrutinze the media’s methods of covering the case, and deem that certain codes of ethics were not adhered to. Rather than remaining neutral, newspapers and TV outlets allowed themselves to “be used” by Mike Nifong, the former District Attorney for Durham and prosecutor of the case, by reporting only his version of the incident and investigation (11). While some newspapers like Newsweek and The News & Observer were relatively quick to recognize flaws in the investigation, many prominent outlets like The New York Times overlooked important evidence and published inaccurate information. In response to this, the Duke Lacrosse Case saw a huge rise in blog reporting, as many sought to uncover the truth. Conclusively, the media overstepped its boundaries when reporting on this particular case, demonstrating the compelling effects sensationalism has on the field of journalism.
On August 17, 1998, exactly one year after making the statement above, President Bill Clinton prepared to deliver a speech concerning a scandal that had gripped the nation for months. It is needless to say that this was an important moment during the Clinton administration. After accusations of sexual harassment, Clinton addressed the nation and admitted to having a relationship with Monica Lewinsky. In this critical speech Clinton set out to admit to wrong-doings, provide a few reasons for his action, and ultimately persuade the audience into moving on and forgetting the scandal. This essay will break down his speech into sections and examine the most and least effective strategies that Clinton employed and how well he executed those strategies. This is an interesting speech given under rare circumstances. Not since Watergate had an American president been under such harsh moral criticism from the public. By looking critically at this speech we are able to gain valuable insight into Clinton's motives.
Media concentration allows news reporters to fall victim to source bias, commercial impulse, and pack journalism. Together, all three of the aforementioned factors become known as horse race journalism, a cause for great concern in campaign media. In complying with horse race journalism, media outlets exclude third party candidates, reinforce the idea that politics is merely a game, and dismiss issues that directly affect voters and their day to day lives. Through horse race journalism, the media is mobilized in impeding an active form of the democratic debate in American politics. Even across the wide range of human values and beliefs, it is easy to see that campaign media coverage must be changed, if not for us, then for our children. It is imperative that we discern the flaws of the media and follow our civic duty to demand better media
What has changed in the media and political culture? Why is exploitation of sex and politics on front burner of the American agenda? The private matters of the President were once just that — private matters. Now they are published and are accessible to the American public by way of the Starr Report (http://CNN.com/starr.report/)and the mainstream media. The impeachment of the President symbolizes the pinnacle of the integration of sex and politics by the media.
Through these definitions and specifics on each, it is easy to see how both intertwine and are closely related. Now what we know what each is it is time to examine which of the two is a more serious concern. Personally, in understanding the two, I would have to say that libel is a more serious issue with broadcast media. To be more specific, the worst possible thing a journalist or...
The Watergate Scandal involved a number of illegal activities that were designed to help President Richard Nixon win re-election. The scandal involved burglary, wiretapping, campaign financing violations, and the use of government agencies to harm political opponents. A major part of the scandal was also the cover-up of all these illegal actions. “Watergate, however, differed from most previous political scandals because personal greed apparently did not play an important role. Instead Watergate attacked one of the chief features of Democracy – free and open elections” (Worldbook 1).
“The old argument that the networks and other ‘media elites’ have a liberal bias is so blatantly true that it’s hardly worth discussing anymore…No we don’t sit around in dark corners and plan strategies on how we’re going to slant the news. We don’t have to. It comes naturally to most reporters.” (Bias: A CBS Insider Exposes How the Media Distort the News) This example is tremendously important in the author’s discussion because it proves that news stories do manipulate people through bias. Popular news networks are viewed by thousands of people every single day, thus making it have a huge impact on the public since they believe what they see. When news reporters present their news segments, it is natural for them to give their insights due to human nature being instinctively biased. “The news media is [sic] only objective if they report something you agree with… Then they’re objective. Otherwise they’re biased if you don’t agree, you know.” (CNN’s American Morning) In this quote, the readers are presented to current panelists agreeing that news consumers have a very hard time separating their own view of the news from the perspective of the news reporters because they are presenting their own opinions throughout their segments. This problem exists once again because of the bias that is contained in media
Woodward and Bernstein's undertaking constructed the cornerstone for the modern role of the media. The making of the movie about the Watergate Scandal and the ventures of the two journalists signify the importance of the media. The media’s role as intermediary is exemplified throughout the plot of the movie. The movie is the embodiment of journalism that guides future journalists to progress towards the truth, no matter what they are going up against. It was the endeavor of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein that led them to the truth behind the president’s men. They showed that not even the president is able to deter the sanctity of journalism in its search of truth. The freedom of speech, the freedom of the press, and people’s right to know account for the same truth that journalists pursue; the truth that democracy is alive and will persist to live on.
The introduction of the internet to modern society has brought about a new age of information relation. Since there is no longer a need to wait until the next print day, news from all over the world is available at a person’s fingertips within hours or even minutes of the event. With this advent of such easily accessible information, new problems for the news media have also arisen. Aside from potentially losing good economic standing because newspapers are no longer being purchased in the quantities they used to be, the credibility of the information itself is also put into question. No one would argue that credibility of news sources is unimportant, but there is a discrepancy in what takes precedence; economy and speed or getting the information out correctly at the first publishing by taking the time to make sure all facts are checked. The importance of having a system of checks on all information submitted is paramount. People trust what they read and believe it to be so without always questioning. If all information were to not be checked thoroughly, there would be instances where people read an article only for information included to be wrong and they go on believing such information. This can be very dangerous as misinformed people make misinformed decisions. With an increase in errors being made by citizen bloggers and even major publications, many are worried that journalistic ethics and credibility in the news media are being sacrificed in order to maintain swiftness in the news circuit and to retain personal profits. Though getting information to the masses quickly is a major part of the media’s importance, this should not mean that the credibility of that information being presented should be sacrificed for it...
Journalists and reporters for the major networks will strongly denounce the suggestion that they favor of one side or the other when it comes to being politically biased. On the other hand there are other media sources that come right out and say they are “Liberal Intelligence” such as “The American Prospect”. In another article from the American Prospect website, they talk about border security and how good Obama and the Democrats are doing at making the border laws stricter. In the article they say, “In the last two years, President Barack Obama has introduced border-enforcement policies that are stricter than those of his predecessors, leading to record number of deportations and massive spending on security resources (American Prospect).” Never once do they mention that the border security has not been as large of an issue in the past, and the government was more worried about the terrorism from 9/11 and our economic crisis. This example shows how a publication that is considered to be more to the left, favors democrats by showing them in a more positive light.
During the Vietnam War, a rift between government officials and journalists emerged. The American government felt the need, for various reasons, to censor many war developments. In an attempt to act ethically, the press fought the censors, trying their hardest to report the truth to the general public. Despite claims of bias and distortion by several prominent government officials, these journalists acted completely ethically, allowing the general public to obtain a fair, informed opinion.
As a law enforcement officer, my fundamental duty is to serve mankind; to safeguard lives and property; to protect the innocent against deception, the weak against oppression or intimidation, and the peaceful against violence or disorder; and to respect the constitutional rights of all men to liberty, equality and justice.
"Journalism Ethics Online Journalism Ethics Gatekeeping." Journalism Ethics for the Global Citizen. Web. 05 Dec. 2010. .
In trying to attract new audiences, news media have begun to transition from reporting to becoming a form of entertainment. With the meteoric rise of social media’s role as a news source, the fight for an increase of diversity in the media, and the ever-growing desire of immediate content, the future of responsible journalism is more important than ever. Ask yourself, why do I think the way I do? Where do my political views originate? How do I prove them? Most likely, it is due to the biased portrayal of issues in the media and the politicization that accompanies what we consume. Now, compare your views to your preferred news reporting entity. More than likely, they are the same.
Meyers, C. (2010). The 'Standard Journalism ethics: a philosophical approach? Oxford University Press. Nordenstreng. K. (1995)