There is a line that should not be crossed when it comes to the privacy of the individual. When a private person is involved in an incident that is in the public interest - there needs to be a respect for their personal privacy.
In the tutorial we discussed this reguarding several issues. I actually made the statement that when looking at a story from our perspective (journalists), in contrast to the actual personal feelings of the parties involved we will go for the story. If an editor is telling us to go out and write a story about the young South African 'Hemaphrodite' runner or our job will be cut - we will go get the story.
As journalists though we need to know where we truly stand. It isn't right for us to go and cast a negative light over something out of someone's control - she (I will be referring to her as a she as this is the identity that she knows herself as) didn't know she was a hemaphrodite and didn't live as a man - so for the media to push this story the way that they did raises some ethical concerns - I believe.
The story about the young boy at Mullumbimbi high school, who was named and facts seemed to have been very 'falsificated or fabricated.' The approach by most news sources towards this story were horrible and it seems that they held very few ethical standards. In the case of this story privacy was breached and this should be dealt with.
The question again though - 'If it's your job, or the story; do you get the 'news'?'
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I completely agree with you Mark. There needs to be a line, I'm just not exactly sure where we should draw it. Most importantly there is a need for newsworthiness to be considered. For example, is it really newsworthy that a boy at Mullumbimbi High School was killed during a fight? Yes it certainly is newsworthy. The problem is when morals are strayed to the point that children are being unwillingly filmed, and the boy was named. The ethical concerns in the school situation are very real, and cause extreme emotional turmoil if not handled correctly. This was extremely evident during the Media Watch link shown during the presentation. The school children's utter disgust for the media said it all. How are we supposed to enter into the workforce and feel we can be respected as professionals when it is evident school children as young as 12 have more moralistic fibre than many reporters? It does not reflect upon the profession well at all, which is a major problem if we expect people to believe what we say is unbiased and true.
ReplyDeleteIn terms of celebrities, I think it changes a little bit. They have not been thrust into the spotlight. Rather, they made a choice (at some point they did make a choice) to be in the spotlight and profit from this. As such their misbehavior ‘can’ be seen as the public’s interest.
I think if they are abusing substances, sex tapes and other bad behaviour then let the world know, it is their fault, and as people who are often looked up to they need to be made accountable. Obviously, everyone makes mistakes, me included, but if you are going to take good publicity and use it to your advantage, be prepared for bad publicity.
On the other hand, celebrities are people too. Their emotional turmoil is no less devastating than ours. As such I think that family struggles such as marriage breakups, deaths and things of this nature are a bit different. Sure, report them but they have a use by date, and report them with the due care and integrity that such emotionally challenging things should be treated.