Ethics 7

Media's Responsibility

Name

Institution

Media's Ethical conduct and Responsibility

Some major incidences in the recent past have highlighted the issue of media responsibilities and ethical conduct globally. One of these was the “Royal prank” in 2012 that led to the suicide of a nurse in the UK. Christian and Greig, hosts at Australia’s 2DayFM called the King Edward VII London Hospital where the Duchess of Cambridge was admitted. The duo pretended to be Prince Charles and Queen Elizabeth II and asked to be updated on the progress of the Duchess. The call was answered by Jacinta Saldana, a nurse who proceeded to put them through to Kate’s ward where the duo received confidential information on the condition of the duchess which they went on to air and the indiscretion went viral worldwide. Nurse Saldana committed suicide days later and the duo’s show was cancelled.

In July 2011, News of the World publication was exposed as having hacked many phones including those of the Royal Family, families of victims of crime and celebrities. Though its top executives denied culpability, the paper was found guilty and opted to close operations. Consequently, inquiries into the ethics of the press were launched by PM David Cameron. These unearthed reckless disregard for respect of individual privacy and accuracy and called for the journalism to be more grounded in ethics (Thomas, 2014).

This paper seeks to explore the practice of journalism in the context of the Deontological, Utilitarianism and Situational theories of Ethics and examine how media institutions and practitioners can apply these to render their practice more Ethical.

Ethics in Media Practice

Press freedom that is accompanied by media institutions and practitioners being accountable and responsible is advocated in the Social Responsibility Theory. It therefore flows that ethical principles will be born out of a responsible media. According to Ward (2011), ethical perplexities do not entirely become eliminated by an affirmation of responsibility; rather, a media that claims to be responsible can not be either egotistical or reckless. In the social responsibility theory, ethics are brought into play under the verity that the media is subject to the opinion of the community, the actions of the consumers and professional ethics. At the core of this is media ethics since the press has the freedom to serve the public’s purpose as opposed to that of vested interests and other groups. In this theory, the practitioner is assumed to be rational and capable of discernment between right and wrong.

Deontological theory of ethics as developed by Immanuel Kant emphasizes the ethics of duty. The theory makes the assertion that a professional has an obligation to the society to use media ethics in their work and that the continuance of ones duty is what is considered as correct ethically (Thomas, 2014). To deontologists, actions are either intrinsically right or wrong. The journalists are therefore charged with the duty of making decisions based on how ethical they are.

Under deontology, practitioners have no allowance to tweak stories to fit certain desired consequences. A free media offers a guarantee for the freedom of expression which is a fundamental right. However, as put forth by deontology, the people in the media must always remember that in the exercise of this freedom, they are expected to be duty bound. In the media, the presentation of images has been one of the commonest causes of contention. Practitioners have been accused of manipulation of images in order to suit the tone of their story or transplanting the image from its context without stating as much (Couldry, 2013). This amounts to failing one’s duty.

Utilitarianism holds that the course of action that results in the maximum utility (specifically the reduction of suffering and the maximization of happiness) is the proper one. It follows then that a journalist’s action’s moral worth is determined solely by the resultant outcome. The jury is however still out on the amount of consideration that ought to be given to foreseen, intended and actual consequences (Thomas, 2014). In this line of thinking, the “royal pranksters” might argue that the nurse’s suicide (actual outcome) was not part of their intentions

In situational ethics of the media, it is advocated that there wrong or right depend on the prevailing situation. Under the theory, moral rights and rules are not universal and each case presents its unique challenges calling for unique solutions. The theory flatly refuses the concept of prefabricated guidelines for decisions and prescribed rules. It teaches that ethical decisions should adhere to flexible guidelines on a case by case basis rather than follow absolute rules (Thomas, 2014). Journalists should therefore observe situations rather than follow a set of principles that has been set previously.

A journalist who adheres to situational ethics will approach issues touching on ethics with a general set of moral principles as opposed to a rigorous prefabricated set of ethical rules and is ever willing to sacrifice even these principles if by doing so, he/she feels that greater good will be achieved (Couldry, 2013). Since cases can be altered by circumstances, ‘situationism’ in practice holds that what one journalist might call right in some place and time is wrong to another journalist in other places and times.

Acting and conducting themselves ethically is a textbook rule of the careers of journalists and they ought to, at all times choose the actions that uphold the mass media’s responsibilities while minimizing the possibility of harm to others.

References

Couldry, N. (2013). Why media ethics still matters. Global media ethics: Problems and perspectives, 13-27.

Thomas, R. J. (2014). A Dialectic Approach to Journalism Ethics: Fascinating, yet Unfulfilled. Journal of Mass Media Ethics, 29(3), 200-202.

Ward, Stephen (2011). Ethics and the Media: An Introduction. Cambridge U.P: London.