Ethical Journalism

The journalism profession is one that has gotten a fair share of backlash following the presidential election. The media has been blamed for influencing the outcome of this election by focusing far too much negative attention on certain candidates. The paramount rule of journalism involves knowing the rule that a journalist should “Do No Harm.”

One way to interpret this is that doing no harm means that journalists treat their sources with respect. Journalists should have compassion, especially when asking questions that might cause their source distress. For example, if a journalist were to ask a question to a mother at a crime scene where her loved ones had been harmed, the journalist should not begin asking questions without first acknowledging the devastating situation. Journalists should write their stories in a way that is respectful of the feelings of their sources. First and foremost, journalists are human beings, who should show understanding for people.

While it is important to follow the trail of a hard-hitting news story, journalists should not be intrusive when pursuing a story. In the example of the mother at the crime scene, a journalist could sympathize with the mother and offer words of comfort before launching into reporter mode. In addition, journalists have to make the decision of whether the public’s need to know the story outweighs the potential harm it may create. 

The adage "the pen is mightier than the sword" is most certainly true. Journalists should weigh the consequences of publishing information that could harm private individuals. When journalists often do research into people’s pasts to write a story, they might find offensive material about their subject that would make a great news story, but also damage the reputation of the person they are writing about. Journalists must decide if the benefits of letting the public know about the crimes that someone had committed in the past would outweigh the damage such a revelation would do to that person’s job, family, and life.

For journalists, minimizing harm also means making sure that their sources of information are correct. Journalists should do their own research to make sure that their source of information is the right one. If reporters write a story proclaiming that someone is guilty of a crime, the reporters should double check that what they are writing is true. For example in the case of Boston Marathon bombing, the journalists should have double checked the sources they used for their stories. Speculation without facts allowed journalists to damage a reputation of an innocent boy. The damage to the innocent boy could have been avoided had the reporters done more research.

When journalists and editors make a decision to publish something that could harm someone, they consider the public’s benefit from knowing the information. If the public’s need to know the information outweighs the harm it would do to someone, the news story should be published.