Ethics in Journalism

759 Words4 Pages
Ethics in Journalism Nancy Durham is a freelance video journalist for CBC, cable news, and British Channel 4, to name a few. Her journalistic objective is to "make viewers care about ordinary people trapped in wars". While investigating the Balkan area, she met an 18 year old girl named Rajmonda that was recovering in a hospital from the trauma of seeing her sister, Quendressa, killed in a Serb attack. She expressed to Durham how she was thinking about joining the KLA. By the request of the news stations, Durham returns to KLA headquarters to do a set of follow-ups on Rajmonda. This is how Durham finds that Rajmonda not only lied and was already a member of the KLA before she met the reporter, but her sister is in fact alive and well. Nancy Durham's story had been reported in three different countries and more than once. How could she effectively remain a credible journalist while still holding her vow to help those "trapped in war"? Should Nancy run(ignore the fact that her story is false) or should she stay and face it? See Nancy run. Nancy Durham can now be accused of deceiving the public and fabricating the facts, even if it was mainly Rajmonda's abuse of the publicity she granted to her. She has a duty as a journalist to "truth in reporting", which defines the lack of accuracy and research in her depiction of war in the Balkan area. Nancy Durham could completely ignore the mistakes she made in hopes that it would fall out of the news. But then she would be constantly worried that interested news stations would appoint another journalist to follow-up on her story, hence, exposing her inaccuracies. See Nancy fall. Her fleeing of the dilemma, could be the very thing that signifies her guilt a... ... middle of paper ... ...in a war ridden land. She also has an obligation to Rajmonda to illustrate the cause of her exaggeration. Durham should tell the audience how it was for a good cause...for the good of her people, "her family". This also supports Mill's perspective. Rajmonda did this for the "greater good" of her people...it doesn't make a difference that she lied. "The ends justifies the means" Clearly, she did it to bring awareness to the forgetting outside world. Even if it isn't her story, it is someone else's story. Nancy Durham must write a follow-up article stating the truth, but bringing recognition to the fact that Rajmonda had no other choice but to lie. This way not passing the buck onto Rajmonda, a young girl who has obviously been through a lot. By doing this, Nancy Durham remains employed and Rajmonda sustains the public's sympathy and support.
Open Document