 |
| Topic: |
| Audio: |
|

Download |
|

Listen Online |
This text will be replaced
|
| Guest: |

Dale
Jacquette, Professor of Philosophy, The Pennsylvania
State University |
| What
is it? |
Freedom
of speech tells us the government shouldn't restrict the
journalist. But should anything restrict the
journalist?
Should the duty to inform be limited by the duty not to betray national
security, not to injure the innocent, not to corrupt the jury pool, and
similar considerations? How do we draw the line?
John and
Ken welcome Dale Jacquette from Pennsylvania State University to delve
into the ethics of journalistic practice.
|
Listening Notes
John kicks the conversation off by asking what role journalists
ought to play in society. Guest Dale Jacquette replies that
journalists are obligated to provide relevant truth telling in the
public’s interest. A journalist, then, is just anyone who
tries to find the facts and report them to an interested public.
John challenges this definition, he wonders whether all relevant truths
ought to be reported regardless of social consequences. For
example, after the shootings at Virginia Tech, NBC aired footage the
killer had sent to the station. By airing the footage, NBC was
reporting relevant facts about the case, but they may also have created
an incentive for copycat killers. Jacquette maintains that it is
the public’s responsibility to regulate news coverage by speaking
out against inappropriate reporting. Ken doesn’t like this
market approach to regulating journalists because the market is
unreliable and imperfect. Jacquette agrees and concludes that we
also need better education for journalists and federal regulations to
protect us from journalistic malfeasance. Ideally, in
Jacquette’s mind, journalists would regulate themselves, but
realistically we need better education and legislation in addition to
market pressures to guarantee quality news coverage.
Ken is still unimpressed by Jacquette’s the market approach
because many of the ethical problems plaguing journalism today are
rooted in the fact that all the major news networks are owned by huge
corporations. Jacquette concedes that corporate ownership can
create motive conflicts in the news room. Ken expands on his
point, arguing that because corporate news networks are in constant
competition for viewers, networks pressure their journalists to lure
viewers in with sensationalist stories instead of investing in quality
journalism. Jacquette disagrees, he believes that news networks
can still work for the public’s interest even with corporate
ownership. The ethical challenge journalists face in a corporate
environment is drawing a clean line between editorializing and simply
reporting the facts.
Next, John, Ken and Jacquette move on to the topic of blogs.
Jacquette describes blogs as a wild west, an untamed territory of
journalism that is ‘buyer beware’ in the sense that it is
much more difficult to separate reliable blogged information from
unreliable blogged information than it is to turn to a major news
network and get the facts. Ken disagrees, he thinks blogs are
better than corporate news sources because corporate news editorializes
while pretending to present bare facts. Bloggers, on the other
hand, editorialize openly so blogs are a more honest news source than
the networks. Dale acquiesces, but notes that bloggers receive
almost all of their information from the major news networks.
John reconciles the two views, although bloggers receive most of their
information from corporate sources bloggers are free to draw more
radical conclusions with that information than corporate journalists
are allowed to.
Dale agrees with John’s assessment, but he still feels ambivalent
about corporations owning media outlets. He reiterates his point
that it is the public’s responsibility to demand better
journalism from corporate networks. Ken worries that most people
demand poor quality, sensationalist news and Jacquette admits that
‘the people’ often demand entertainment more often than
they demand great journalism.
At the end of the conversation, John is left a bit underwhelmed.
Journalists ought to challenge the elite, which means challenging both
the government and major corporations. But whether they work for
a major news network or for PBS journalists’ salaries are
dependent on corporations or the government’s public media
budget. Ken agrees that the situation is a little depressing. But
on a more optimistic note, John does feel less skeptical about bloggers
and their ability to challenge the status quo.
- Zoe Corneli the Roving Philosophical Reporter (Seek to 4:12) – Zoe talks to a journalist who was put behind bars for over 200 days.
- Ian Schoals the Sixty-Second Philosopher
(Seek to 49:48) – Dishonest journalists aren’t the only
ones making the news, Ian reflects on a rash of non-fiction writers
charged with exaggerating the truth.
Additional Resources
Internet Articles
Books
|
|
|