Ethical Questioning: Media Blackout Edition

Every article published goes through a series of ethical questioning, consciously or not, to make sure everybody (the media, the people involved, and the audience) is ready for it.

The New York Times recently did this with the McCain article.

Another example?

"Why we agreed to a media blackout on Harry" by Bob Satchwell.

Quiz Me

MediaShift's Mark Glaser put together an interesting weblog , claiming that in the background of the bloggers vs. journalists argument: "mainstream media reporters have started blogging in droves, while larger blog operations have hired seasoned reporters and focused on doing traditional journalism."

To prove his point on how the lines between journalism and bloggers are blurring, he put together a quiz only Andrew Keen (and perhaps Brian Steffen) could pass (I won't tell you how badly I did on this, but I can tell you that my score would make you feel better about yourself).

1. Who won a recent Polk Award for investigative journalism, a blogger or MSM reporter?

2. Which big New York-based website has four editors and four reporters, and is looking to hire two more reporters — a blog or traditional media outlet?

3. Which site hired a young blogger fresh out of college? Blog or MSM site?

4. Which site in Silicon Valley edits 80% of stories before being published online? Blog or MSM site?

(see his article for the answers)

Interesting. Very interesting, indeed. Isn't it a great day to be both a journalist and a blogger?

Times Editor Speaks Out

Click here to read NYT's executive editor Bill Keller speaks out in a Q & A session about the controversial McCain article.

McCain Mayhem

The NYT's story on McCain's alleged affair has been questioned even before it was printed for its questionable ethics. However, as Kelly McBride, ethics reporter for Poynter, explains, the ethics of reporting on the story holds potential problems:

• If you start with McCain's denial of wrong-doing, he looks guilty.

• If you start with a statement that the McCain campaign was thrown into turmoil today, he looks guilty.

• If you start with the allegation that McCain's staffers were worried that he was having an affair, you make him look guilty.

True. So how should media outlets report on the NYT's story without causing further ethical dilemmas?

Here's an alternative structure: Give your audience the big picture. Tell them that the nation's largest and most prestigious paper published a long, complex story today, calling into question McCain's judgment on many issues. As part of that story, the newspaper revealed that eight years ago the senator's staffers feared he was having an affair with a lobbyist, who seemed to show up at unexpected times. Explain how news is originated and then repeated. Explain that many people have questions about The New York Times' approach. Examine the entangled relationship between journalism and politics. (McBride)

Follow that format to make sure everyone is getting the news they need, instead of continuing to smear either the Times or McCain.

Ridiculous, right?

Should it matter how journalists vote as long as their opinions stay out of their stories. Absolutely not.

Online Time

Richard Stengel, managing editor of Time magazine, stated Tuesday that "someday there will be people who don’t know there’s a print product."



Whoa. Pretty big statement right?



Not really. Everybody knows that print media is becoming a way of the past as more and more newspapers and magazines move online. The only question remains whether movements of the journalism world to the Internet will help counteract "The Cult of the Amatuer," as related by Andrew Keen.



Time magazine, a trusted source for genuine news, has made the decision (as have most other print media outlets) to become an online news site. Stengel claims “there’s no news that breaks in print anymore.” True enough.

I believe that, as long as people know and understand where to go for trusted news, genuine journalism sites (there are plenty out there), we can counteract the potentially harmful affects of the bloggosphere. As a society, we're smart enough and savvy enough to know how to locate these sites. Just trust us to guide ourselves.

Media apology for lack of campaign coverage

The Montana Kaimin ran an op-ed piece yesterday, apologizing to Ron Paul supporters for the paper's lack of campaign coverage. However, would they have apologized if Paul hadn't "won more delegates than any other candidate at the Missoula County Republican Caucus?" Doubtful.

Keen's elitism: is there a golden mean?

Poynter's E-Media Tidbits column for the day, written by Amy Gahran, highlights part of an post from USA Today's Beau Dure, citing the differences between two extremes of elitism practiced in the online world:

"Beneficial elitism is the notion that we can all handle the truth and make educated decisions. Its enemy is the ersatz populism so often practiced by politicians who prey on Americans' anti-intellectualism. ...Jon Stewart is practicing beneficial elitism. If only more people would follow his lead.

"Harmful Elitism is loosely akin to cynicism. It's the assumption of someone else's inferiority, leading to a premature dismissal of what that person is saying or doing.

I'm sure Andrew Keen would like to believe he is a "beneficial elitist" - however, I'm not so sure. What I've read of The Cult of the Amatuer (I'm nearly finished) seems to suggest his beliefs are more in line with "harmful elitism."

However, the book and Dure's quote made me stop and think: is there a golden mean to find between the two extremes? And, if there is, the most important thing journalists and bloggers can ask is how we can acheive this golden mean.

I agree with Keen that we do need some gatekeepers, some experts (so to speak) to help us filter out the good information from the bad. But at the same time, I can't help but believe that, as a society and as individuals, at some level we have the power to understand the truth and decide for ourselves. We could just recognize both points of view, but is that more of a compromise, a social contract, than a golden mean?