I had a reaction to the dialogue surrounding Hatfill coverage by Nicholas Kristof of the New York Times that took place in class when I watched the September 30th video. Specifically, that because Kristof somehow had less obligation to be responsible in his representation of facts because he was a columnist not a reporter. This was disturbing to me. Should there be a different bar for the level of integrity in communciating facts to the public based upon your unique role within a news organization? Or should the paper's code of ethics be applicable to everyone within the organization?
href="<$BlogItemURL$>"><$BlogItemTitle$>
5 comments:
Hi Jeanette,
I had a little bit of a different impression of what was meant by different bar. Columnists have more leeway to voice their opinion about events and therefore to write about compilations or hypotheticals. As far as a beat reporter's duties, their obligation is to relay the facts as objectively as possible, but both should be ethical and responsible as far as that type of article goes. It seems like the difference would be stylistic, as if you were writing a research paper versus an opinion piece or persuasive paper. All could be ethical but have different guidelines. Does that make sense?
Megan I agree with your post 100%.
Though columnists and reporters may have diverse responsibilities/ obligations, I think they should receive identical penalties for disseminating unethical/ erroneous statements to the public, despite their title at the news organization.
I believe it's perfectly okay for columnists to take a stance. As long as the projected purpose of the column to provide more of an opinionated, less objective personal view on a matter is out in the open, then no harm is done. It's the responsibility of the reader to take it for what it is.
However, this doesn't justify the withholding of information to give a column a certain projection. While columnists can take stances on matters, they should still be held to the same standard as journalists in that they should have to do so factually. Opinions can be presented in columns, but only upon the foundation of transparent fact.
When facts important to a story are being withheld that is just one more thing to add to the list of the diminishing role of the watchdog journalist. More and more journalist, columnists, reporters and beyond can be found taking sides or creating versions of a story that fit their needs. Its a dangerous slippery slope.
I really believe that a universal code of ethics for journalists should be enforced otherwise the public will continue to lose faith in what they hear or read.
As a few of you have said, I believe that there should be a common code of ethics for reporters and columnists. However, it is clear that columnists write more opinion pieces and this should be understood by readers. Regardless of whether a journalist is writing as a news reporter or a columnist, their treatment and dissemination of the facts should be held to the same standards. I do think that in some cases, an opinion writer should be even more cautious of ommiting or stretching some of the facts to further his of her opinion.
Post a Comment