Welcome to SPJ Blogs Sign in | Join | Help

Is it unethical when journalists don't do their jobs well?

The query from the University of Montana journalism graduate student caught me off guard.

“My basic thesis is that over-reporting on select incidents leaves less room for reporting on vital issues,” she wrote. She defined an incident as the Virginia Tech massacre and an issue as global warming.

Her message described three scenarios in which she felt journalists were unethical because of the lack of coverage. She wanted to know what I thought.

The three scenarios she posed as evidence of lack of issues coverage were the HIV travel ban, federal funding for privately run pregnancy crisis centers and global warming. I was ignorant of the first two, and it appeared her thesis was the reason why.

A saying in the news business suggests if it isn’t reported in the news, it didn’t really happen. That is especially true today as mainstream media mergers have eliminated diversity of ownership and voices in even the largest U.S. cities. The Internet is the news frontier, a place where independents can have a voice. But, good and bad, Internet sources don’t have the supposed credibility and history of mainstream media outlets.

So if the mainstream media ignore a story, it doesn’t really exist. I don’t know whether that rises to the level of being unethical, but it certainly isn’t the best use of the freedom guaranteed the news media by the First Amendment.

If media consumers don’t demand issues-oriented news coverage, they won’t get it and they will continue to leave mainstream media in droves.

Nerissa Young is a visiting assistant professor in the Department of Mass Communications at Shepherd University and a member of SPJ’s Ethics Committee.
Published Wednesday, May 30, 2007 11:17 AM by NerissaYoung

Comments

# re: Is it unethical when journalists don't do their jobs well?

Friday, June 01, 2007 8:23 PM by ElysseJames
I wouldn't use the term 'unethical' unless the issues were topics that reporters were consciously avoiding reporting, but it does present a tip as to what we can do better as news gatherers. And definitely something to keep in mind and keep us on track when 'incidents' occur.

# re: Is it unethical when journalists don't do their jobs well?

Wednesday, June 06, 2007 12:42 PM by Laura Gonzo
Would it be considered unethical if reporters were deliberately presenting or ignoring stories in such a way that they distort public perception?

As an example, I see a lot of stories about "pit bull attacks" and am aware that numerous stories of attacks that are of similar significance but committed by other breeds of dogs go unreported.

There's an interesting study by the National Canine Research Council showing that, on a particular day, a pit bull attack was picked up by 91 local and national media outlets while several bites of equal or higher severity were reported by as few as one local outlet.

This is significant, as it leads communities to consider and enact ill-advised and ineffective legislation.

It also indirectly leads to abuse and suffering of an entire population of dogs that have been inappropriately marginalized, largely by the media.

I would be interested in the comments of other members.

# re: Is it unethical when journalists don't do their jobs well?

Tuesday, June 19, 2007 7:12 PM by NickR
In some world views, being lazy is considered to be a vice, and is unethical to be. Because many post-mega-merger newsrooms are understaffed and underfunded, too many journalists rely on other publications to guide them to the news. While these pressures surely must be great, they serve as no excuse for journalists to behave as moths who can only fly toward the brightest light. Their lack of significant coverage of critical issues is a disservice to our democracy. While they have helped Americans fully explore the question of when Paris Hilton will go back to jail or revel deeply in the human tragedy and historic significance of an easily preventable college shooting (gun policy and public access to health),  a powerful few have had been able to crush our rights, wrongly invade other sovereign nations, torture several hundred men just for being Muslim and more. While the journalists can't take all the blame these atrocities committed in our name, their laziness does nothing to foster the informed dissent required to stop immoral programs are steadily weakening the moral authority of the United States.
Anonymous comments are disabled. Please log in or create an account to comment on this article.