Moral minefields: legal and ethical dilemma

What a complex and interesting topic. Our group chose this as our presentation topic and I’m glad that we did. In my section I delved into the ethical dilemmas journalists face.

We don’t have the best reputation, regularly having our integrity ranked below that of politicians, and just slightly above those selling used cars. Our job requires a great deal of ethical consideration.

In Briet it notes that as journalists ‘we are faced with choices where no amount of calculation is going to render an unambiguous answer’.

Because words have such power to influence the way in which we regard people or events we must be constantly assessing the implications of what we say and write. We must not only consider ethical obligations but also consider if our work could lead us into legal problems.

Some of the most common legal issues journalists run into are defamation; sub judice contempt where excessive media commentary on a case could cause prejudice as well as disobedience contempt where journalists refuse to reveal their sources in court.

When it comes to legal territory journalists can always seek a lawyer’s advice before publishing a story – however ethical advice isn’t so easy to come by.

The Journalism industry is self regulated – and there are not always specific ethical rules for journalists to follow. There are two types of ethical codes that most Australian journalists are exposed to: the internal codes of individual media outlets and the Australian Journalist Association’s code of ethics.

While most journalists see the AJA code as a useful tool, it is not enforceable. The AJA code of ethics takes as its overriding statement that ‘Respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism’. The code has 12 clauses which are to do with upholding Honesty, Fairness, Independence and Respect for the rights of others.

Some of the major ethical issues that journalists face are to do with upholding accuracy and objectivity. I have learned recently that a lack of accuracy in a journalists article can sometimes be the fault of the sub editor who may add in facts to the story which they assume are true. Even if a journalist has thoroughly checked their work , there is no certainty to what will appear in the paper the next day. There is also the question of whether objectivity exists. If three journalists were given the same article , all three articles would most likely be framed from different angles.

 There are also the complexities surrounding grieving families.  My journalism lecturer often speaks about her first ‘death knock’. The story always sends shivers down my spine. How far is too far? Her natural reaction was to stop the camera rolling when the victim’s brother broke down in tears. Back at the office she got in trouble off her boss for not capturing the boy’s break down on tape. I’m afraid of the way journalist’s can be expected to suppress their natural human instincts in order to grab a good story.

Gifts and bribes are another major issue. Receiving gifts can be legal, but is it ethical? We also need to be careful when reporting on minority groups and suicide.

I’m doing my placement at the newspaper at the moment and so often I think, I bet no one even reads my articles. Then my boyfriend said that he saw a random person reading one of my articles. Then it hit me that The Newcastle Herald has a huge readership and there are probably a lot of people who have been reading my work. Sometimes as a journalist you can forget the number of people your work can influence and affect. We have a great reasonability upon us to report accurately, fairly and to know when the public’s right to know outweighs the ethical and legal standards we must usually abide by.