How Audiences Values Impact A Journalists Ethics

Pertaining our class discussion about the Fallen Marine, and concerns surrounding whether or not it is ethical to publish photo's of the fatality; combined with Professor Herrin's lecture about news values and topics that make a story newsworthy...

I believe that at the end of the day we all value being ethical individuals and strive to serve public interest. However the news industry thrives on delivering stories about controversy, conflict, interest, objectivity, and etc. Since we retain reader loyalty through providing our audience with groundbreaking information on emerging controversies. It makes our audience feel like the "proud innovators", as they circulate the latest stories amongst their family, friends, or colleagues.

Everyday on television and in the newspapers we don't just see pictures of Obama, MJ, and Madoff. We also see photos of ordinary faces and I think it is absolutely meaningless.

I think via delivering a story with photo's of people taking action/heroism, the story becomes much more meaningful, as our audience is empowered to listen and they will more likely acknowledge our key messages. Therefore we need to do more qualitative research to gain insight -- on how our audiences value's impact our ethics as journalists, and the information, photo's, and media we incorporate into the stories we cover.

If the press only published the following photo to cover Mr. Bernard's story, would we gain a similar perspective on his story?

If the AP did not incorporate the following photo of Mr. Bernard wounded on the battle field bleeding, could they convey their key messages about the tragedy of war? Would we acknowledge Mr. Bernard's story in a similar perspective?

I don't think we would receive the same message if they only published the first photo of Mr. Bernard's face because he looks like an ordinary marine. This is just my opinion....