Internet Code of Ethics

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

car and find a half-dozen pornographic magazines strewn across the backseat. You have a deadline in 30 minutes; what details do you include in your story?

  You are the editor of the campus newspaper. One of your reporters has just written a series of articles describing apparent health-code violations in a popular off-campus restaurant. This particular restaurant regularly buys full-page ads in your paper. After you run the first story in the series, the restaurant owner calls and threatens to cancel all her ads unless you stop printing the series. What do you do?

  You are doing your first story for the campus paper. A local businessperson has promised to donate $5 million to your university so that it can buy new equipment for its mass communication and journalism programs. While putting together a background story on this benefactor, you discover that he was convicted of armed robbery at age 18 and avoided prison only by volunteering for military duty during the closing months of the Korean War. In the more than 50 years that have passed since then, his record has been spotless. He refuses to talk about the incident, claims his wife and his closest friends do not know about it, and threatens to withdraw his donation if you print the story. Naturally, university officials are concerned and urge you not to mention this fact. Do you go ahead and include the incident as simply one element in your overall profile? Do you take the position that the arrest information is not pertinent and not use it? Do you wait until the university has the money and then print the story?

We could go on listing examples, but by now the point is probably clear. There are many situations in the everyday operation of the mass media in which thorny questions about what to do or not to do have to be faced. Most of these situations do not involve laws or regulations but instead deal with the tougher questions of what is right or what is proper. Informal controls over the media usually assert themselves in these circumstances. In this chapter we will discuss the following examples of informal controls: personal ethics; performance codes; internal controls, such as organizational policies, self-criticism, and professional self- regulation; and outside pressures.

personal ethics Ethics are rules of conduct or principles of morality that point us toward the right or best way to act in a situation. Over the years philosophers have developed a number of general ethical principles that serve as guidelines for evaluating our behavior. We will briefly examine five principles that have particular relevance to those working in the mass media professions. Before we begin, however, please note that these principles do not contain magic answers to every ethical dilemma. In fact, different ethical principles often suggest different and conflicting courses of action. There is no perfect answer to every problem. Also, these ethical principles are based on Western thought. Other cultures may have developed totally different systems. Nonetheless, these principles can provide a framework for analyzing what is proper in examining choices and justifying our actions.

Ethical Principles

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

The Principle of the Golden Mean Moral virtue lies between two extremes. This philosophical position is typically associated with Aristotle, who, as a biologist, noted that too much food as well as too little food spoils health. Moderation is the key. Likewise, in ethical dilemmas the proper way of behaving lies between doing too much and doing too little. For instance, in the restaurant example mentioned earlier, one extreme would be to cancel the story as requested by the restaurant owner. The other extreme would be to run the series as is. Perhaps a compromise between the two would be to run the series but also give the restaurant owner a chance to reply. Or perhaps the story might contain information about how the restaurant has improved conditions or other tempering remarks.

Examples of the golden mean are often found in media practices. For example, when news organizations cover civil disorders, they try to exercise moderation. They balance the necessity of informing the public with the need to preserve public safety by not inflaming the audience.

The Categorical Imperative What is right for one is right for all. German philosopher Immanuel Kant is identified with this ethical guideline. To measure the correctness of our behavior, Kant suggested that we act according to rules that we would want to see universally applied. In Kant’s formulation categorical means “unconditional”—no extenuating circumstances, no exceptions. Right is right and should be done, no matter what the consequences. The individual’s conscience plays a large part in Kant’s thinking. A categorical imperative is discovered by an examination of conscience; the conscience informs us what is right. If, after performing an act, we feel uneasy or guilty, we have probably violated our conscience. Applied to mass communication, a categorical imperative might be that all forms of deception in news gathering are wrong and must be avoided. No one wants deception to become a universal practice. Therefore, for example, a reporter should not represent him- or herself as anything other than a reporter when gathering information for a story.

The Principle of Utility Utility is defined as the greatest benefit for the greatest number. Modern utilitarian thinking originated with the 19th-century philosophers Jeremy Bentham and John Stuart Mill. The basic tenet in their formulations is that we are to determine what is right or wrong by considering what will yield the best ratio of good to bad for the general society. Utilitarians ask how much good is promoted and how much evil is restrained by different courses of behavior. Utilitarianism provides a clear method for evaluating ethical choices: (1) Calculate all the consequences, both good and bad, that would result from each of our options; then (2) choose the alternative that maximizes value or minimizes loss.

Looking at the mass communication area, we can easily see several examples of utilitarian philosophy. In 1971 the New York Times and other papers printed stolen government documents known as the Pentagon Papers (see Chapter 16). Obviously, the newspapers involved thought that the good that would be achieved by printing these papers far outweighed the harm that would be done. (Note that the Kantian perspective would suggest a different course of action. Theft is bad. Newspapers do not want the government stealing their property, so they should not condone or promote the theft of government property.) Or take the case of a small midwestern paper that chose to report the death of a local teenager who had left town, turned to

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

prostitution and drugs, and been murdered. The paper decided that the potential benefits of this story as a warning to other parents outweighed the grief it would cause the murder victim’s family.

The Veil of Ignorance Justice is blind. Philosopher John Rawls argued that justice emerges when everyone is treated without social differentiations. Everybody doing the same job equally well should receive equal pay. Everybody who got an 80 on the test should get the same grade. Rawls advocated that all parties in a problem situation be placed behind an imaginary barrier, the veil of ignorance, that conceals roles and social differentiations and that each participant be treated as an equal member of society as a whole. Rawls’s veil of ignorance suggests that we structure our actions to protect the most vulnerable members of society. It is easy to see the relevance of this principle to the workings of the mass media. If we applied the veil of ignorance to the problem of hammering out the proper relationship between politicians and journalists, the blatant adversarial relationship so often found between the groups would disappear. Behind the veil all news-makers would be the same. Inherent cynicism and abrasiveness on the part of the press would disappear, as would mistrust and suspicion on the part of the politicians. On a more specific level, consider the case of a financial reporter who frequently gets tips and inside information on deals and mergers that affect the prices of stocks and passes these tips on to friends who use this information for their own profit. The veil of ignorance suggests that the reporter must treat all audience members the same. Personal friends should not benefit from inside information.

The Principle of Self-Determination This principle, closely associated with the Judeo-Christian ethic and also discussed by Kant, might be summarized as “Love your neighbor as yourself.” Human beings have unconditional value apart from any and all circumstances. Their basic right to self-determination should not be violated by using them as simply a means to accomplish a goal. A corollary to this principle is that no one should allow him- or herself to be treated as a means to someone else’s ends. Suppose that sources inside a government investigation on political corruption leak to the press the names of some people suspected of taking bribes, and the press, in turn, publishes the allegations and the names of the suspects. The principle of self- determination suggests that the press is being used by those who leaked the story as a means to accomplish their goal. Perhaps those involved in the investigation want to turn public opinion against those named or simply to earn some favorable publicity for their efforts. In any case, the press should resist being used in these circumstances. The rights, values, and decisions of others must always be respected.

A Model for Individual Ethical Decisions In numerous situations, personal ethical decisions have to be made about what should or should not be included in media content or what should or should not be done. Every day, reporters, editors, station managers, and other media professionals have to make these decisions. Too often, however, these decisions are made haphazardly, without proper analysis of the ethical dimensions involved. This section presents a model that media professionals can use to evaluate and examine their decisions. This model is adapted from the work of Ralph Potter.1

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

In short, the model asks the individual to consider four aspects of the situation before taking action. First, define the situation. What are the pertinent facts? What are the possible actions? Second, determine what values are involved. Which values are more relevant to deciding a course of action? Third, establish what ethical principles apply. We have discussed five that might be involved; there may be others. Fourth, decide where our loyalties lie. To whom do we owe a moral duty? It is possible that we might owe a duty to ourselves, clients, business organizations, the profession, or society in general. To whom is our obligation most important?

Julian Assange, editor-in-chief of WikiLeaks. The New York Times decided to publish confidential documents obtained by the Web site.

Let us examine how this model would work in a real situation. WikiLeaks bills itself as a nonprofit international organization that publishes secret and private communications submitted by anon ymous sources. WikiLeaks set up a Web site in 2006 and soon had a database with more than 1 million entries. Even so, relatively few people in the United States paid attention to the site until 2010, when WikiLeaks announced it would publish six years’ worth of formerly classified documents regarding the war in Afghanistan. (WikiLeaks would also later publish a trove of diplomatic cables.) The site made a deal with the New York Times, a British newspaper, and a German magazine that would give those publications an advance look at the material and a chance to publish stories about it when the actual documents went online. (Fortunately, Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, published a long apologia for his decision that will help in this analysis.) _______

1Ralph Potter, “The Logic of Moral Argument,” in Toward a Discipline of Social Ethics, P. Deats, ed. (Boston: Boston University Press, 1972).

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

As we saw in the preceding chapter, dealing with the problems presented by publishing classified data was a situation the Times had faced before, and once again the Times faced a clear ethical dilemma. There were good reasons not to run a story. Publishing a story based on the secret documents might endanger national security and severely restrict diplomatic efforts that depend on confidentiality to succeed. Moreover, publishing the information might endanger the lives of people who were secretly working with the United States and its allies. On the other hand, perhaps publication would further public understanding of the conflict and help people decide if the conflict was necessary. Publication would also let citizens compare what the government was publicly telling them to what the government was saying in private. What would the Times decide?

Let’s apply the Potter model and see what we can conclude. First, establish the facts. The Times was dealing with the putative leader of WikiLeaks, an Australian named Julian Assange, whom Keller likened to a character from a Stieg Larsson thriller. Keller was apprehensive about Assange’s motives in providing the information and, at the time, was unclear where WikiLeaks had obtained the documents. Keller assigned a Times employee the task of looking over the documents to see if they were genuine and contained anything newsworthy. The employee reported that the documents were authentic and had news value. Further, the Times ’s lawyers determined that the newspaper would not face legal problems in publishing the information. After due consideration, Keller decided that if the paper published the information, Assange would be treated as a source, rather than a fellow journalist or a partner.

Second, clarify the values. News organizations value openness and the public’s right to know. Would the publication of classified documents serve the public good? On the other hand, governments sometimes need secrecy to conduct sensitive negotiations. Of course, news organizations value human life. Would publication endanger sensitive diplomatic relations and ultimately encourage terrorists? Would people be put at risk if their names were revealed to a potential enemy?

Next, state principles. There are at least three ethical principles involved in this situation. The first is utilitarianism. Do the benefits of publishing the story outweigh the harm that might result? The second is the golden mean. At one extreme the Times could choose not to publish any of the documents; at the other extreme it could choose to publish them all in their original form. The golden mean would suggest that the best course of action lies between these two poles. Perhaps some of the documents could be published with names and potentially harmful information removed. Finally, there is the principle of self-determination. The Times has an ethical obligation not to let itself be exploited or used as a means to an end. Were Assange and WikiLeaks using the Times to pursue their own political agenda? Likewise, the Time s has a similar obligation toward Assange. It should not exploit him for the purpose of breaking a major story.

Fourth, determine loyalties. A journalist’s primary loyalty is to fully report the facts of a story to his or her audience. Of course that is not the journalist’s only loyalty. The press has a loyalty to society that requires it to be a good citizen in a democracy. Jeopardizing international relations may not be the hallmark of good citizenship. Finally, the Times has a loyalty to its own heritage of exposing misdeeds of government officials and agencies. In the Pentagon Papers case mentioned in Chapter

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

16, the Times chose to publish secret documents because they revealed that the government was not being entirely truthful with its citizens about America’s involvement in the Vietnam War.

What did the Times finally decide? The paper chose to publish many of the secret documents but took care not to reveal the names of any persons whose lives might be put in danger by publishing the documents. The Times also redacted any information that might be helpful to the enemy. It appears that the newspaper endorsed the principle of utilitarianism. In an editor’s note, the paper stated that publishing the documents served “an important public interest, illuminating the goals, successes, compromises and frustrations of American diplomacy.” Experts in media ethics generally praised the way the Times handled the situation. The Society of Professional Journalists concluded that the Times had acted responsibly by verifying the information and minimizing harm by redacting certain passages and names. The WikiLeaks episode once again demonstrated that no matter what the choice, journalists should be ready to explain and defend their decisions.

performance codes Many ethical decisions have to be made within hours or even minutes, without the luxury of lengthy philosophical reflection. In this regard media professionals are not very different from other professionals, such as doctors and lawyers. In these professions, codes of conduct or of ethics have been standardized to help individuals make decisions. If a doctor or a lawyer violates one of the tenets of these codes, he or she may be barred from practice by a decision of a panel of colleagues who oversee the profession. Here the similarity with the mass media ends. Media professionals, thoroughly committed to the notion of free speech, have no professional review boards that grant and revoke licenses. Media codes of performance and methods of self- regulation are less precise and less stringent than those of other organizations. But many of the ethical principles discussed are incorporated into these codes.

The Print Media During the colorful and turbulent age of jazz journalism (see Chapter 5), several journalists, apparently reacting against the excesses of some tabloids, founded the American Society of Newspaper Editors. This group voluntarily adopted the Canons of Journalism in 1923 without any public or governmental pressure. There were seven canons: responsibility, freedom of the press, independence, accuracy, impartiality, fair play, and decency. By and large, the canons are prescriptive (telling what ought to be done) rather than proscriptive (telling what ought to be avoided). Some of the canons are general and vague, with a great deal of room for individual interpretation. Under responsibility, for example, it is stated that “the use a newspaper makes of the share of public attention it gains serves to determine its sense of responsibility, which it shares with every member of its staff.” This is a noble thought, but it is of little help when it comes to deciding if a newspaper should include the detail about the pornographic magazines in the star football player’s car. Other statements seem simplistic. Under accuracy, for example, one learns that “headlines should be fully warranted by the contents of the article they surmount.” Nevertheless, these canons should not be

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

dismissed as mere platitudes and empty rhetoric. They do represent the first concrete attempt by journalists to strive for professionalism in their field.

Cartoon Controversy Clip 5: 4 minutes 46 seconds You can watch Clip 5 on the Online Learning Center home page, www.mhhe.com/dominick12e. Select Student Center and then Chapter 17.

This clip discusses how American newspapers decided if they should run a cartoon that had the potential to be offensive to the Muslim population. Do you feel that American comics freely make fun of other religions except for the Muslim religion? Do you think that this particular cartoon was pulled from publication in major U.S. newspapers because they feared a backlash? What ethical considerations should go into a decision such as this? Have you ever been offended by a religious cartoon?

When the canons were first released, Time magazine held out grandiose hopes for the future of the profession: “The American Society of Newspaper Editors (ASNE) aims to be to journalism what the American Bar Association is to the legal fraternity.” Time was overly optimistic. The legal fraternity, through its powerful bar associations, has the power to revoke a member’s license to practice. Journalists have fiercely resisted any idea that resembles licensing as a restriction on their First Amendment rights. For this reason, the ASNE has never proposed licensing or certifying journalists. In fact, the ASNE has never expelled a member in its history, even though it has had ample reason to do so.

The Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ; formerly Sigma Delta Chi) adopted its code at about the same time as the ASNE. The code was designed to guide journalists working in all media. The SPJ code remained unchanged for more than 45 years, but as journalistic ethics became more problematic, the code was revised in 1973, 1984, 1987, and again in 1996. The current SPJ code is organized around four main principles:

1.  Seek the truth and report it. Journalists should be honest, fair, and courageous in reporting the news.

2.  Minimize harm. Journalists should treat sources, subjects, and colleagues as human beings deserving of respect.

3.  Act independently. Journalists should be free of obligation to any interest other than the public’s right to know.

4.  Be accountable. Journalists should be accountable to their audience and to each other.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

In 1975 the Associated Press Managing Editors (APME) association adopted a code that also discussed responsibility, accuracy, integrity, and independence. Revised in 1995, the APME code covers such issues as plagiarism and diversity. As with the ASNE’s canons, adherence to the code is voluntary. Neither the SPJ nor the ASNE association has developed procedures to enforce its codes.

In late 1999 the Gannett Company became the first newspaper chain to spell out ethical principles for its papers. Other newspaper chains have companywide guidelines covering general issues, but individual papers can set policy in their own newsrooms. The Gannett guidelines are the first to be newsroom-specific. The decision to establish guidelines stemmed from a growing public distrust of the media and a desire to reassure readers about the fairness and accuracy of newspaper content. These guidelines forbid, among other things, lying to get a story, fabricating news, and publishing misleading alterations of photographs.

Broadcasting For many years radio and television broadcasters followed the National Association of Broadcasters (NAB) Code of Good Practice. This code first appeared in 1929 and was revised periodically over the years. It was divided into two parts, one covering advertising and the other covering general program practices. In 1982, however, a court ruled that the code placed undue limitations on advertising, and the NAB suspended the advertising part of its code. The next year, to forestall more legal pressure, the NAB officially dissolved the code in its entirety.

Although the code is gone, its impact lingers. In 1990 the NAB issued voluntary programming principles that addressed four key areas: children’s TV, indecency, violence, and drug and substance abuse. The new guidelines were stated in a broad and general way: “Glamorization of drug use and substance abuse should be avoided. . . . Violence . . . should only be portrayed in a responsible manner and should not be used exploitatively.” To stay out of trouble with the Justice Department, the NAB declared that there would be no interpretation or enforcement of these provisions and that the standards were not designed to inhibit creativity.

Trying to resurrect a code for broadcasters is a favorite activity among politicians. In 1997 four U.S. senators introduced a bill that would exempt the broadcasting and cable industries from antitrust laws so that they could develop a new code. Other bills that urged broadcasters to develop a voluntary code of conduct were introduced in Congress in 1998 and 1999. Support for a new code cropped up again in 2004 after Janet Jackson’s wardrobe malfunction during the Super Bowl’s halftime show. The FCC and members of congress suggested that a new code would help limit indecent broadcasts, but nothing came of the effort. There have been no serious attempts to revive the code since 2005.

In the broadcast journalism area, the Radio and Television News Directors Association has an 11-part code that covers everything from cameras in the courtroom to invasion of privacy.

The V-chip and its companion ratings system are an interesting interaction between formal and informal controls. For purposes of this discussion, it is important to point out that the V-chip represents an example of the government’s pressuring the video industry to adopt “voluntary” guidelines that categorize programming. If the industry

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

failed to develop its own program ratings to work with the V-chip, Congress left the door open for the FCC to do it for them. The threat of government action has been used before to prod broadcasters into reforms that they were reluctant to make on their own. In fact, scholars who have studied the FCC have even given this phenomenon a name: the “raised eyebrow” technique. The V-chip legislation is a bit stronger than the raised eyebrow, but its end result is the same.

Producers rate program content according to an age-based scale ranging from “TVG,” suitable for a general audience, to “TV-M,” for mature audience only. Further, special advisories for specific content are also displayed: “S” for sexual content and “V” for excessive violence. Parents can set the V-chip to block whatever programming they feel is unacceptable for their children. For example, the V-chip can be set to block all “TV-M”-rated shows. Interestingly, in its 2007 report on television violence, the FCC declared that the V-chip, while helpful, was not an effective tool in protecting young people from violent TV content. Despite a public service campaign to educate viewers about the device, a 2007 survey noted that about 90 percent of respondents didn’t use it.

Motion Pictures Codes of conduct in the motion picture industry emerged during the 1920s. Scandals were racking Hollywood at that time (see Chapter 10), and many states had passed or were considering censorship laws that would control the content of movies. In an attempt to save itself from being tarred and feathered, as it were, the industry invited Will Hays, a former postmaster general and elder of the Presbyterian Church, to head a new organization that would clean up films. Hays became the president, chairman of the board, and chairman of the executive committee of a new organization, the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America (MPPDA). In 1930 this group adopted the Motion Picture Production Code. The code was mainly proscriptive; it described what should be avoided in order for filmmakers to get their movies past existing censorship boards and listed what topics should be handled carefully so as not to rile existing pressure groups. The 1930 code is remarkable for its specificity; it rambles on for nearly 20 printed pages. The following are some excerpts:

The presentation of scenes, episodes, plots, etc. which are deliberately meant to excite [sex and passion] on the part of the audience is always wrong, is subversive to the interest of society, and is a peril to the human race.

The more intimate parts of the human body are the male and female organs and the breasts of a woman.

a.  They should never be uncovered. b.  They should not be covered with transparent or translucent material. c.  They should not be clearly and unmistakably outlined by garments. . . .

There must be no display at any time of machine guns, sub-machine guns or other weapons generally classified as illegal weapons. . . .

Obscene dances are those which represent sexual actions, whether performed solo or with two or more, which are designed to excite an audience, arouse passion, or cause physical excitement.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

A few years after the Production Code was drafted, a Roman Catholic organization, the Legion of Decency (see “Media Probe: The Legion of Decency”), pressured the industry to put teeth into its code enforcement. The MPPDA ruled that no company belonging to its organization could distribute or release any film unless it bore the Production Code Administration’s seal of approval. In addition, a $25,000 fine could be levied against a firm that violated this rule. Because of the hammerlock that the major studios had on the movie industry at this time, it was virtually impossible for an independent producer to make or exhibit a film without the aid of a member company. As a result, the Production Code turned out to be more restrictive than many of the local censorship laws it was designed to avoid.

The Production Code was a meaningful force in the film industry for about 20 years. During the late 1940s, however, changes that would ultimately alter the basic structure of the motion picture industry also led to the code’s being scuttled. In 1948 the Paramount case ended producer-distributor control of theaters, thus allowing independent producers to market a film without the Production Code seal. In addition, economic competition from television prompted films to tackle more mature subjects. The industry responded during the 1950s by liberalizing the code; despite this easing of restrictions, more and more producers began to ignore them. Nonetheless, the code, outdated and unenforceable, persisted into the 1960s. A 1966 revision that tried to keep pace with changing social attitudes proved to be too little too late.

In 1968 the motion picture industry entered into a new phase of self-regulation when the Production Code seal of approval was dropped and a new motion picture rating system was established. Operated under the auspices of the Motion Picture Association of America (successor to the MPPDA), the National Association of Theater Owners, and the Independent Film Importers and Distributors of America, this new system, commonly referred to as the MPAA rating system, places films into one of five categories:

G: Suitable for general audiences. PG: Parental guidance suggested.

PG-13: Some content may be objectionable for children under 13 (a new category added in 1984).

R: Restricted to persons over age 17 unless accompanied by parent or adult guardian.

NC-17: No children under 17 admitted. (This category replaced the X rating in 1990. The MPAA made the change in response to several producers who argued that adult-themed, daring, but nonpornographic films should not be lumped into the same category as porno films.)

Unlike the old Production Code, which regulated film content, the new system leaves producers more or less free to include whatever scenes they like as long as they realize that, by so doing, they may restrict the size of their potential audience. One possible repercussion of this system may be the steady decline in the number of G-rated films released each year. Producers evidently feel that movies in this category will be perceived as children’s films and will not be attractive to a more mature audience. During the first 11 years of the rating system’s existence, the percentage of films in the G category dropped, while the percentage of films in the R category increased. X-rated or NC-17-rated films have never accounted for more than 10 percent of the total

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

number of films submitted for review (of course, many low-budget, hard-core pornographic films are never submitted for classification).

In order for the MPAA rating system to work, producers, distributors, theater owners, and parents must all cooperate. There is no governmental involvement in the classification system; there are no fines involved. Moviemakers are not required to submit a film for rating.

The Advertising Industry In the advertising industry several professional organizations have drafted codes of performance. The American Association of Advertising Agencies first adopted its Standards of Practice in 1924. This code, which covers contracts, credit extension, unfair tactics, and the creative side of advertising, contains provisions prohibiting misleading price claims, offensive statements, and the circulation of harmful rumors about a competitor. The Advertising Code of American Business, developed and distributed by the American Advertising Federation and the Association of Better Business Bureaus International, covers much the same ground. Memberships in these organizations and adherence to the codes are voluntary. In public relations the Public Relations Society of America adopted its first code in 1954 and revised it during the 1980s. As with the other codes, enforcement is essentially voluntary, and the society has no control over a practitioner who is not a member.

   The Legion of Decency

Probe After World War I, during the roaringest part of the Roaring Twenties, the films that grossed the most money had titles like Red Hot Romance, She Could Not Help It, Her Purchase Price, and Plaything of Broadway. One movie ad of the period boasted breathlessly of “brilliant men, beautiful jazz babies, champagne baths, midnight revels, petting parties in the purple dawn.” Before long, public opposition to such sensational movies began to form. The appointment of Will Hays, the creation of the Motion Picture Producers and Distributors of America, and the adoption of the Motion Picture Production Code were designed, in part, to forestall this public criticism.

Much of the code was suggested by a Roman Catholic layman, Martin Quigley, and a Roman Catholic priest, Father Daniel Lord. Despite the existence of the code, however, sensational films still appeared in significant numbers. This trend was disturbing to many segments in society, particularly the Catholic Church. Keep in mind that at this time the United States was in the midst of a severe economic depression. Many individuals, including prominent Catholics, connected the country’s economic poverty with the nation’s

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

moral bankruptcy as evidenced by the films of the period. Additionally, an Apostolic Delegate from Rome took the film industry to task in a blistering speech before the Catholic Charities Convention in New York.

In April 1934 a committee composed of American bishops responded to the speech and to the general tenor of the period by announcing the organization of a nationwide Legion of Decency, whose members were to fight for better films. The legion threatened to boycott those theaters that exhibited objectionable films, and it sometimes made good on its threats. The Chicago chapter of the legion enrolled a half-million members in a matter of days and was matched by equal enrollment in Brooklyn. Detroit Catholics affixed “We Demand Clean Movies” bumper stickers to their cars. Other religious groups joined the legion—Jewish clergy in New York, Lutherans in Missouri. Pope Pius XI praised the legion as an “excellent experiment” and called upon bishops all over the world to imitate it.

There were 20 million Catholics in the United States in 1934, and naturally the film industry took this group seriously. The Production Code Administration was set up with the power to slap a $25,000 fine on films released without the administration’s seal of approval. The Legion of Decency’s boycotts hurt enough at the box office to force many theaters to book only films that the legion approved. In Albuquerque, New Mexico, 17 of 21 theaters agreed not to book a film condemned by the legion. In Albany, New York, Catholics pledged to avoid for six months each theater that had screened the condemned film Baby Doll. Producers, frightened by this display of economic power, began meeting with legion members to make sure there were no potentially inflammatory elements in their films.

By the 1960s, however, the Legion of Decency was losing most of its clout. The restructuring of the film industry allowed independent producers to market their films without code approval. Many producers did just that and demonstrated that some films could make money even without legion and Production Code approval. The increasingly permissive mood of the country encouraged an avalanche of more mature and controversial films. Moreover, the legion, renamed the National Catholic Office for Motion Pictures, painted itself into a corner when it condemned such artistically worthwhile films as Bergman’s The Silence and Antonioni’s Blowup, and endorsed such films as Godzilla vs. the Thing and Goliath and the Sins of Babylon. By the 1970s this group had effectively lost all its power; it was essentially disbanded in 1980. Nonetheless, during its prime the Legion of Decency was the single most effective private influence on the film industry.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

The Motion Picture Association of America’s rating is a prominent part of most theater marquees.

   Policing YouTube

Probe About 20 hours of video are uploaded to YouTube every minute. Making sure that inappropriate content doesn’t appear on the site is obviously a big job. Like many other content-sharing sites, YouTube depends greatly on its users to keep things proper.

First, the site expects users to abide by its Community Guidelines. In addition to the obvious copyright cautions, here are some of the “common-sense rules” that YouTube has established concerning inappropriate content:

  YouTube is not for pornography or sexually explicit content. If this describes your video, even if it’s a video of yourself, don’t post it on YouTube. Also, be advised that we work closely with law enforcement and we report child exploitation.

  Don’t post videos showing bad stuff like animal abuse, drug abuse, underage drinking and smoking, or bomb making.

  Graphic or gratuitous violence is not allowed. If your video shows someone being physically hurt, attacked, or humiliated, don’t post it.

  We encourage free speech and defend everyone’s right to express unpopular points of view. But we don’t permit hate speech (speech which attacks or demeans a group based on race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, and sexual orientation/gender identity).

Second, visitors are given the chance to flag offending videos if they think content is in violation of the site’s guidelines. YouTube staff

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

members review every flagged video to see if it conforms to its content policy. If it doesn’t, it is taken down from the site and a warning is sent to the user. If the violation is extreme or if the user continues to post inappropriate content, the account might be suspended or canceled.

In late 2008, YouTube announced stricter guidelines for users. It expanded its interpretation of sexually suggestive ads and stated that such ads would not be available for viewing by those under 18. In addition, suggestive videos and those with profanity and vulgarity would be banned from the site’s Most Viewed and Top Favorites listings. The crackdown comes as YouTube struggles to make a profit. Convincing advertisers that the site has become more respectable is one step toward that goal.

internal controls Codes established by professional organizations and individual ethics are not the only informal controls on media behavior. Most media organizations have other internal controls that frequently come into play. Written statements of policy can be found in most newspaper, television, radio, and motion picture organizations. In advertising, a professional organization for self-regulation has existed since 1971.

The reality series Jersey Shore raised questions about what was acceptable in prime time.

Organizational Policy: Television Networks’ Standards and Practices For many years each major network maintained a large department that was usually labeled “Standards and Practices” or something similar. Staff members in these departments would make literally thousands of decisions each season on the acceptability of dialogue, plotlines, and visual portrayals. During the late 1980s,

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

however, network budget cuts took their toll, and most of these departments were scaled back dramatically. As criticism of television content increased during the 1990s, these departments were enlarged somewhat, but they still have far fewer people working in them than they did in the early 1980s. The departments at Fox, NBC, and ABC review everything their networks air, including commercials. At CBS the standards department reviews children’s programs, docudramas, ads, new shows, and about a dozen existing series. The efforts devoted to monitoring standards vary greatly among cable networks. MTV, for example, closely monitors all its programs; the Discovery Channel rarely has problems regarding taste. Pay channels, such as HBO, have more liberal standards.

   Ethical Problems Shared by Journalists and

College Students It is unethical for journalists to plagiarize the work of another or to fabricate a story by making up facts and inventing sources. Similarly, when writing research papers, it is unethical for college students to plagiarize and to make up information. What should be the appropriate punishment for such offenses for journalists? For college students? Those were the questions under investigation in an October 2009 article by Mike Conway and Jacob Groshek published in Communication Education.

For six semesters, the researchers surveyed students enrolled in journalism classes at the beginning and again at the end of their program of studies, just before graduation. The investigators were able to gather data from 2,925 students, an extremely large sample for a survey. The survey questions asked about how concerned students were about several ethical issues relating to plagiarism and fabrication by both journalists and students.

The results suggested that students were more concerned about ethical lapses among professional journalists than they were about ethical violations committed by students. For example, about 56 percent of the students were quite concerned or very concerned about their fellow students making up quotes, but about 80 percent were quite or very concerned about journalists making up quotes. Similarly, about 46 percent of students were concerned about their peers stealing information from the Internet, but 83 percent were concerned if journalists did the same.

The students were also much more lenient on themselves when it came to punishment. About two-thirds of the students thought that journalists found guilty of plagiarizing or fabricating information should be fired. But what about college students who fabricate or steal or copy from the Internet without attribution? Only 2 percent of the students thought that expulsion was the appropriate penalty for those infractions. The same trend emerged for making up sources.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

Approximately 61 percent of the students thought that a journalist who makes up sources should be fired, but only 3 percent of the students thought that students who make up sources should be expelled.

As the authors of the article state, “[I]t is quite clear that students are far more concerned about professional journalists behaving badly than they are about students failing to meet fundamental ethical standards.” The authors don’t speculate on why students are far more sympathetic to their comrades than they are to professionals. That’s an issue that would make a separate research project in itself.

By the way, the title of this article pretty well sums it up: “Forgive Me Now, Fire Me Later: Mass Communication Students’ Ethics Gap Concerning School and Journalism.”

The broadcast and cable networks are also relying more and more on the judgment of series producers to determine standards of acceptability. Producers, for their part, have a general notion about how far they can go without raising network displeasure. The networks will generally closely monitor the first few episodes of a series that may cause problems. After that they will put more trust in the producers’ standards.

It is probably obvious to any casual observer of broadcast television that network standards have become more liberal over the years. For instance, top-rated CSI has broadcast episodes dealing with sadomasochism and sexual fetishes. Modern Family and Grey’s Anatomy have gay characters as stars.

There are several reasons behind these changes. First, society has become more open-minded. Subjects that were once taboo, such as male impotence, are now discussed routinely in commercials. Second, the broadcast networks have to compete with the more permissive cable networks, on which shows such as Sex and the City have pushed the envelope of acceptability even further. Finally, the sex scandal involving President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky put sexual topics on the evening newscasts and immediately eliminated many taboos.

Despite this liberalization the networks’ standards and practices departments still exercise some caution. Offensive stereotypes are not allowed. Networks traditionally have not aired ads for abortion clinics, contraceptives (some local stations have aired contraceptive ads), or massage parlors.

The Internet can provide an outlet for material that the standards and practices department deems inappropriate for broadcast TV. The unedited versions of comedy skits from network shows such as Saturday Night Live sometimes make their way onto YouTube or other video-sharing sites.

In addition to the networks, local stations also exercise self-regulation. Occasionally, a local station will decide that a network show is inappropriate for its audience and decline to show it or broadcast it at a later time. For example, a Salt Lake City station refused to carry NBC’s 2011 drama The Playbay Club.

Local stations also construct a policy book. This book typically spells out the station’s philosophy and standards of operation and identifies which practices are encouraged or discouraged. For example, most television and radio stations have a policy against news-room personnel functioning as commercial spokespersons. Radio stations typically have a policy against airing “homemade” tapes and records. Other

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

stations may have rules against playing songs that are drug-oriented or sexually suggestive. Commercials that make extravagant claims or ads for questionable products and services might also be prohibited under local-station policy.

Organizational Policy: Newspapers and Magazines Newspapers and magazines create policy statements that take two distinct forms. Operating policies cover the everyday problems and situations that crop up during the normal functioning of the paper or magazine. Editorial policies are guidelines that the newspaper or magazine follows to persuade the public on certain issues or to achieve specific goals.

Operating policies vary from one paper or magazine to another. In general, however, these policies cover such matters as accepting freebies, using deception to gather information, paying newsmakers for a story or exclusive interview (checkbook journalism), taking junkets, conducting electronic surveillance, using stolen documents, accepting advertising for X-rated films, and publishing the names of rape victims. Also covered are outside employment of reporters and editors and conflicts of interest. Here, for example, are excerpts from the Rules and Guidelines used by the Milwaukee Journal:

Free tickets or passes to sports events, movies, theatrical productions, circuses, ice shows, or other entertainment may not be accepted or solicited by staff members.

A gift that exceeds token value should be returned promptly with an explanation that it is against our policy. If it is impractical to return it, the company will donate it to a charity.

Participating in politics at any level is not allowed, either for pay or as a volunteer. Public relations and publicity work in fields outside the Journal should be avoided.

Some newspapers and magazines are liberal; some are conservative. Some support Democratic candidates; others support Republicans. Some are in favor of nuclear energy; others against. These and other attitudes are generally expressed in the editorial pages of the newspaper. Editorial policy is generally clear at most publications. The Chicago Tribune has traditionally expressed a conservative point of view. The New York Times has a more liberal policy. The editorial policy of a paper will exert a certain amount of control over the material that is printed on its editorial pages. Of course, the paper has a perfect right to do this. There may be times, however, when the editorial policy of the paper spills over onto its news pages, and this might cause a problem for the paper’s reputation for objectivity, responsibility, and integrity.

One problem that crops up periodically is called boosterism, a procommunity philosophy that sometimes causes not-so-good news to go unreported. In Flint, Michigan, when the local Fisher Body plant closed, TV networks and newspapers across the country announced the bad news that Flint was about to lose 3,600 jobs. The local Flint paper did not mention the job loss until the 11th paragraph on an inside page. “Good news,” however, got prominent play: A story about new shrubs being planted at the local Buick facility earned front-page coverage.

Owners and publishers can exert editorial control over news policy in several ways. They can hire only those people who agree with their editorial views. For example, the New Orleans Times-Picayune ran an ad in a trade magazine for a business reporter.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

One of the qualifications was a “probusiness philosophy.” They can also fire people who produce stories that the owner does not like, or they can issue orders to downplay some topics while paying large amounts of attention to others.

   Disappearing Public Editors

Public editors (the term newspapers use to refer to ombudspeople) are an endangered species. As newspapers trim their staffs to reduce costs, one of the first positions to go is that of public editor. In 2008, about a dozen papers announced that they were laying off public editors or assigning them to different jobs. (A dozen may not sound like a lot, but remember that there were only about 40 papers that employed public editors.)

Will the disappearance of these positions make newspapers less responsive to their readers? Some editors defend the cuts by noting that newspapers must give priority to news gathering, selling advertising, and customer service in order to stay in business. If the newspaper folds, its responsiveness to readers is a moot point. Other editors contend that the public editor is not the only method that ensures that newspapers keep in touch with their readers. A recent article in the trade publication Editor & Publisher quotes the editor of the Orlando Sentinel: “Papers can distance themselves too much from readers if everything goes to one person.” At the Sentinel, every editor is directly accountable to readers. Another argument suggests that technology has made public editors irrelevant. Modern newspapers allow comments on stories, editor blogs, and forums that permit discussion about stories.

There is, of course, another side to the argument. The public editor was the one person that people could contact if they had a problem. Public editors gave readers a voice that wasn’t lost in the chatter of story comments or forums. Moreover, the public editor could be an advocate for readers inside the newspapers, and a full-time, in-house advocate is more likely to get a response from management than a comment posted at the end of a story. In addition, suggesting that all editors are responsible to readers spreads the responsibility so thin that it may result in nobody being responsible. Further, public editors developed ties within the community that are lost when the position is eliminated. Losing these ties eliminates another channel of reader- newspaper interaction. Finally, the public editor was a symbol who embodied the idea that newspapers were accountable for their mistakes and their operations were open for public inspection. Eliminating the public editor might hurt the credibility of a publication.

Perhaps the unkindest cut of all occurred when, after having a public editor for more than 40 years, the Louisville Courier-Journal

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

decided to eliminate the position. The person who last held the job was also the president of the Organization of News Ombudsmen.

What is the significance of these examples for the news-consuming public? For one thing, the sample cases are probably exceptions to the norm rather than the norm itself. Nonetheless, they do illustrate the potential hazards of relying on only one source for news. The intelligent consumer of news and information should rely on several different media to get a more complete picture.

Media Self-Criticism Some informal control over media content and practices comes from within. Although the amount of internal media criticism has grown in the past few years, it is still small when compared with the amount of investigative reporting and critical analyses that newspapers, magazines, television, and radio conduct about other facets of society. Many newspapers and magazines have media critics and media reporters. The amount of meaningful critical writing done by these journalists, however, is highly variable. Some of the better-known critics in the print media are Ken Auletta of the New Yorker, Howard Kurtz of the Daily Beast, and Tom Shales of the Washington Post.

A few journalism reviews regularly criticize media performance. The Columbia Journalism Review is the best known, but its circulation is only about 18,000. Others that are important are the American Journalism Review and the St. Louis Journalism Review.

The Internet has opened up a new channel for media self-criticism. The Media Channel (www.mediachannel.org), for example, contains news, analysis of issues, and criticism about media across the globe. Journalist Jim Romenesko maintained a similar site at www.poynter.org. The impact of these and similar sites is yet to be determined.

They Obviously Weren’t Listening Thirty-one engineering students enrolled in a course at a Canadian university were recently punished for cheating. The students had downloaded term papers from the Internet and submitted them as original work. What course were they taking? “Introduction to Ethics.”

Cable and broadcast television networks usually offer few programs with serious criticism of the media. Newspapers do a bit more in this area; the Wall Street Journal has occasionally run an in-depth study of the problems facing the newspaper industry. In film the industry newspaper Variety has sometimes published an article critical of the film industry. Billboard, the trade publication of the sound-recording industry, has run analytical, if not critical, pieces on the recording industry.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

Some newspapers and other media organizations have tried to incorporate an idea from Scandinavia into their operations to provide some internal criticism. An ombudsperson is employed by the company to handle complaints from audience members who feel they have gotten a raw deal. The ombudsperson also criticizes in general the performance of the organization’s personnel. Although the number of ombudspersons (sometimes called public editors) in the United States was never large, interest in the position grew because news organizations were worried that they are losing credibility with their audiences. At one point there were about 40 ombudspersons in the United States, just about all at newspapers. Budget cuts, however, have meant that many ombudspersons are no longer on the job (see “Social Issues: Disappearing Public Editors”). The position is almost nonexistent in TV newsrooms.

Professional Self-Regulation in Advertising In 1971 the leading advertising professional organizations—the Council of Better Business Bureaus, the American Advertising Federation, the American Association of Advertising Industries, and the Association of National Advertisers—formed the National Advertising Review Council. Its objective is to sustain high standards of truth and accuracy in advertising. The council itself is composed of two divisions: the National Advertising Division (NAD) and the National Advertising Review Board (NARB). When a complaint about an ad is made by a consumer or competitor, the complaint goes first to the NAD, which evaluates it. The NAD can dismiss the complaint as unfounded or trivial, or it can contact the advertiser for an explanation or further substantiation. If the NAD is satisfied that the ad in question is accurate, it will dismiss the complaint. If the NAD is not satisfied with the explanation, it can ask the advertiser to change the ad or discontinue the message.

If the advertiser disagrees, the case goes to the NARB, which functions as a court of appeals. Ultimately, if the case does not result in an acceptable solution, the NARB may call it to the attention of the Federal Trade Commission or other appropriate agencies. Sending a case to the FTC happens rarely. In 1993 the board turned over to the FTC the first fraudulent advertising case in the NARB’s 22-year history. Most advertisers generally comply with the NAD’s wishes. In 2010, for example, the NAD recommended that the Liquid HCG Diet discontinue its weight-loss claims on Facebook and Twitter, pending evidence to support those claims.

Industry groups also exert control over advertising for their products. For example, the Miller Brewing Company and the Anheuser-Busch Company voluntarily agreed to remove their ads from MTV because they did not want to appear to be encouraging under-age drinking.

outside influences The larger context that surrounds a media organization often contains factors that have an influence on media performance. In this section we will discuss three: (1) economics, (2) pressure groups, and (3) education.

Economic Pressures

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

Money is a potent influence on media gatekeepers. In commercial media the loss of revenue can be an important consideration in controlling what gets filmed, published, or broadcast. Economic controls come in many shapes and forms. Pressure can be brought to bear by advertisers, by the medium’s own business policy, by the general economic structure of the industry, and by consumer groups.

Pressure from Advertisers The recording industry gets its revenue from the purchase of individual tracks and discs. Consequently, it earns virtually no money from advertisers and is generally immune to their pressures. The film industry makes most of its money from the sale of individual tickets. Advertisers have some limited influence through what is called product placement—an arrangement whereby an advertiser pays a movie studio to include its product in a film. Super 8, for example, had several scenes that featured 7-Eleven convenience stores. Nonetheless, in relative terms, advertisers have only modest influence over motion picture content. In the print media, on the other hand, newspapers depend on advertising for about 75 percent of their income, while magazines derive more than 50 percent of their revenues from ads. Radio and television, of course, depend on ads for almost all their income.

   New Code of Ethics for the Advertising

Industry In March 2011 the Institute for Advertising Ethics (IAE) released a set of ethical principles that it hoped would guide decision making in the world of modern advertising, public relations, and marketing. The principles were developed with help from the American Advertising Federation and the Reynolds Journalism Institute at the University of Missouri. As is the case with most codes of ethics, the eight principles are expressed in general terms and tend to be prescriptive (telling advertisers what to do) rather than proscriptive (telling advertisers what not to do).

Here is a brief summary of the eight principles in the code:

  Advertisers should have high ethical standards.   Advertisers have an obligation to be ethical when disseminating

commercial information to consumers.   Advertisers should distinguish advertising and public relations

content from news and entertainment content, both online and offline.

  Advertisers should reveal all payments or other conditions (such as getting a free product) affecting endorsements in traditional media and social media.

  Advertisers should treat consumers fairly.   Advertisers should never compromise consumers’ personal privacy,

and consumers should have a clear option to opt in or opt out when it comes to providing information.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

  Advertisers should follow state and local laws dealing with advertising and cooperate with industry self-regulation programs.

  Advertisers should privately discuss potential ethical issues, and members of the team creating the ads should be given a chance to voice ethical concerns.

Some of these principles are easier to abide by than others. For example, suppose someone on Twitter is getting a free night at a hotel in return for tweeting positive messages about the hotel. When does the disclosure occur? Only in the first tweet? In every following tweet? With only 140 characters to work with, how much space is left for a message after providing disclosure? Another example: Suppose a member of the creative team putting together an ad has an ethical concern that is not satisfied by internal discussions. Is it ethical for the employee to make his or her concerns public?

The Institute recognizes that these principles are not immutable and that they might be revised based on feedback and changing conditions. Similar to other codes of ethics, the IAE code depends on voluntary compliance. The Institute hopes that advertising agencies and public relations firms will sponsor seminars and conferences to explain the principles and encourage their employees to sign pledges to adhere to the new code.

The actual amount of control that an advertiser has over media content and behavior is difficult to determine. It is probably fair to say that most news stories and most television and radio programs are put together without much thought as to what advertisers will say about them. Occasionally, however, you may find examples of pressure:

  In 2008, a reporter for a Virginia paper wrote unfavorable stories about a local hospital. The hospital complained and pulled all of its advertising from the paper. The reporter was then assigned to another beat. (The paper claimed that the hospital’s actions had nothing to do with the reassignment.)

  Executives at the Boston Herald suspended a reporter who wrote columns critical of a merger between two big Boston banks. One of the banks was a big advertiser in the newspaper and held the mortgage on the newspaper’s building. (Management eventually relented and reinstated the journalist.)

Business Policies Economic pressure on media content is sometimes encouraged by the business practices of the media themselves. When the Massachusetts Supreme Court ruled that a creditor could be sued for harassing those who owed money, the Boston newspapers declined to identify the retail store involved in the suit. The store in question was a big newspaper advertiser. In San Francisco a newspaper killed a column that criticized the Nike Company. It so happened that Nike was the sponsor of the paper’s popular “Bay to Breakers” race.

Trading news coverage for advertising time or space is a common problem. A TV station in south Florida sent a flyer to its advertisers offering to do a news story on

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

them in return for $5,000. While trying to negotiate a contract to carry live drawings for the New York State Lottery, a TV station promised lottery officials positive news coverage of lottery events. In both instances the stations withdrew the offers when their breach of ethics was revealed.

Then there is the problem of revenue-related reading matter. This issue crops up when a new shopping center or discount store opens in a community and gets heavy news coverage, maybe more than is justified by ordinary journalistic standards, in return for advertising revenue. Recently, in Waco, Texas, the local newspaper devoted half its front page and two inside pages (with seven color photographs) to the opening of a new supermarket. Not surprisingly, supermarkets spend a lot on newspaper ads.

These examples are not meant to criticize or impugn the reputation of any medium or profession. There are probably countless, less-publicized examples of newspapers, magazines, television, and radio stations resisting advertising and economic pressure. What you should learn from this section is the nature of the close relationship that can sometimes exist between advertisers and media and the pressures that can result. Most of the time, this relationship causes few problems. When professional judgment is compromised by dollar signs, however, then perhaps the economic pressures are performing a dysfunction for the media.

Pressure Groups Various segments of the audience can band together and try to exert control over the operation of mass media organizations. These groups sometimes use the threat of economic pressure (boycotts) or simply rely on the negative effects of bad publicity to achieve their goals. In radio and television, pressure groups (or citizens’ groups, as they are often called) can resort to applying legal pressure during the license renewal process. Because of broadcasting’s unique legal position, it has been the focus of a great deal of pressure group attention. In 1964, for example, a group of black citizens working with the Office of Communication of the United Church of Christ formed a pressure group and attempted to deny the license renewal of a TV station in Jackson, Mississippi, because of alleged discrimination on the part of station management. After a long and complicated legal battle, the citizens’ group succeeded in its efforts. This success probably encouraged the formation of other groups. John Banzhaf III headed an organization called ASH (Action for Smoking and Health), for example, which was instrumental in convincing Congress to ban cigarette advertising from radio and television.

At about the same time, perhaps the most influential of all the pressure groups interested in broadcasting was formed: Action for Children’s Television (ACT). From a modest start, this group was successful in achieving the following:

  Persuading the networks to appoint a supervisor for children’s programming   Eliminating drug and vitamin ads from kids’ shows   Instituting a ban on the host’s selling in children’s programs   Reducing the amount of advertising during Saturday morning programs   Helping a bill concerning children’s TV pass Congress in 1990

ACT disbanded in 1992. In its final press release, the organization said that its major goal had been achieved with the passage of the 1990 Children’s Television Act and that

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

people who want better television for kids now “have Congress on their side.”

   Political Pressure: The Blacklist

After World War II, during a period generally referred to as the Cold War, tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union ran high. Many in the government feared that communists or communist sympathizers had assumed positions of importance in U.S. society. Anticommunist groups charged that the entertainment industry in particular was home to many communist sympathizers who made films that glorified communism. In 1947, the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC), an investigative committee of the House of Representatives, held hearings on supposed communist influences in the motion picture industry. Many well-known Hollywood stars, along with several directors, producers, and writers, were called to testify before the committee. Citing the First Amendment’s right to freedom of speech and assembly, ten witnesses (dubbed “The Hollywood Ten”) refused to answer the committee’s questions about past or current contacts with the Communist Party. All were cited for contempt of Congress.

Their refusals caused the committee to put more pressure on the film industry to take a stand against communism and reaffirm its commitment to American values. Hollywood executives issued an announcement stating that any witness who refused to answer HUAC’s questions would not be employed by the motion picture industry until they were cleared of contempt charges and had sworn they were not communists. In effect, the Hollywood Ten and others suspected of communist leanings were put on a blacklist and denied the opportunity to work in the film industry.

In 1950, the blacklist spilled over into broadcasting when a group of three former FBI agents published a newsletter called Red Channels that listed 151 people, many in the broadcasting industry, who were allegedly working on behalf of the Communist Party. Although the list was put together using poor and questionable information, broadcasting executives drew up their own informal list of people whose loyalties to the United States were suspect. Anybody on this list had to undergo a demeaning 12-step process of rehabilitation or be barred from working in the industry. Many actors, reporters, writers, and directors had their careers cut short because of this list.

Another self-appointed group dedicated to eliminating what it called the “communist conspiracy,” Aware Inc., sprang up in 1953. Performers whose backgrounds were thought to be the least bit questionable were blacklisted by the organization, and many were unable to find work in the industry. Aware Inc.’s methods went to the heart of the commercial broadcasting system. Its founders threatened

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

to boycott the products of advertisers who sponsored shows with suspected communists. Broadcasters took that threat seriously and avoided hiring anyone on the blacklist.

Aware Inc.’s investigation techniques were slipshod and careless. Many innocent performers were put on the blacklist and had their careers permanently damaged. Finally, one performer, John Henry Faulk, sued Aware Inc. for libel. After hearing the evidence during the trial, the jury was so aghast at the tactics and techniques used by Aware Inc. that they awarded Faulk a record $3.5 million in damages. (Faulk was able to collect only a small portion of this sum because the chief defendant died shortly after the trial.)

The period of the blacklist was not the proudest moment for the film and broadcasting industries. For our purposes, the episode illustrates some of the negative consequences that follow when politicians and pressure groups exert unreasonable power over the media industries.

In the mid-1970s other self-interest groups whose primary interest was not broadcasting began to get involved in television programming. The American Medical Association and the National Parent-Teacher Association both criticized TV violence. The National Organization for Women campaigned for more representative portrayals of women in the mass media. The American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee protested that Disney’s Aladdin featured a song whose lyrics contained a slur against Arabs. Protests by gays and lesbians against the 2000 launch of Dr. Laura Schlessinger’s TV show prompted many advertisers to back out from sponsoring the show and several stations to drop it altogether. Dr. Laura eventually apologized for some of her antigay remarks.

As the audiences of traditional media have gotten smaller, pressure group activity has declined. There are, however, some recent examples. The Parents Television Council has urged its members to file complaints with the FCC about certain episodes of Family Guy, and the Media Research Center has campaigned against what it perceives as liberal bias in TV news. In addition, issues surrounding the Internet have given rise to a new generation of pressure groups. The Center for Digital Democracy has campaigned on behalf of network neutrality, and the Media and Democracy Coalition has spoken out concerning the recent broadband stimulus program.

We can sum up by saying that there are both positive and negative aspects to the activities of these citizens’ groups. On the one hand, they probably have made some media organizations more responsive to community needs and more sensitive to the problems of minorities and other disadvantaged groups. Citizen group involvement with media organizations probably has also increased the feedback between audience and the media industry. On the other hand, these groups are self-appointed guardians of special interests. They are not elected by anyone, and their wishes may not be at all representative of those of the larger population. In addition, many of these groups have exerted unreasonable power, and some extremist groups may actually abuse their influence and do more harm than good.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

Education Education also exerts informal control over the media. Ethics and professionalism are topics that are gaining more and more attention at colleges and universities. In fact, there has been a recent upsurge of interest in teaching ethics at many schools of journalism and mass communication. About 40 percent of the schools in the United States offer a special ethics course to their students. More than half of the approximately 40 books specifically devoted to mass media ethics have been published since 1980. Most of the experts in this area agree that instead of teaching specific codes of ethics to students, a systematic way of thinking about ethics should be stressed, so that individuals can consider issues and arrive at decisions rationally.

Even this book can be thought of as a means of informal control. The hope is that, after reading it, you will bring a more advanced level of critical thinking and a more sensitive and informed outlook to your media profession or to your role as a media consumer.

main points   There are several types of informal controls on the mass media, including

ethics, performance codes, organizational policies, self-criticism, and outside pressures.

  The most important ethical principles that provide guidance in this area are the golden mean, the categorical imperative, the principle of utility, the veil of ignorance, and the principle of self-determination.

  All the media have performance codes that guide professional behavior.   Many media organizations have standards departments that monitor the

content that is published or broadcast.   The National Advertising Review Council is the main organization that

supervises self-regulation in advertising.   Outside pressures from advertisers can sometimes influence media conduct.   Special-interest groups, such as Action for Children’s Television, have been

successful in modifying the content and practices of the TV industry.

questions for review 1. What are the main ethical principles discussed in the chapter? 2. Why was the NAB Code of Good Practice discontinued? 3. What is the difference between editorial policies and operating policies? 4. What is an ombudsperson? What does he or she do? 5. What are some ways advertisers can influence news content?

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

questions for critical thinking 1. How would you handle each of the examples mentioned in the introduction to

the chapter? 2. What are some of the advantages and disadvantages of written codes of

conduct? 3. Do special-interest groups exert too much power over the media? 4. Do advertisers have too much power over the media? 5. Consider the case of the New York Times and Wiki-Leaks discussed at the

beginning of the chapter. Did the paper act ethically?

key terms golden mean categorical imperative utility veil of ignorance self-determination MPAA rating system policy book operating policies editorial policies ombudsperson

internet resources Online Learning Center On the Online Learning Center home page, www.mhhe.com/dominick12e, select Student Center and then Chapter 17.

1. Use the Learning Objectives, Chapter Outline, and Main Points sections to review this chapter.

1118273 - McGraw Hill Education ©

2. Test your knowledge of the chapter using the multiple choice and flashcard features of the site.

3. Expand your knowledge of concepts and topics discussed in the chapter with additional Questions for Critical Thinking and Internet Exercises.

surfing the internet There are few Web sites that deal with the topics discussed in this chapter, but the ones listed here are relevant.

www.mediaethicsmagazine.com Examines practical and theoretical ethical issues in mass media communication.

http://asne.org/AdminTools/Articles/ The American Society of Newspaper Editors has collected codes of ethics from about three dozen media organizations.

www.mpaa.org/ratings Information about the MPAA movie rating system. The MPAA offers Red Carpet Ratings Service—an e-mail update of the ratings of movies about to be released.

www.poynter.org/category/latest-news/everyday-ethics The Poynter Institute’s ethics page. Good for finding out about the most current ethical issues.

www.spj.org/ethics.asp The ethics page of the Society of Professional Journalists. Contains the latest ethics news and an “Ethics Hotline” that you can call for advice.