What I would like you to do is to answer the following questions in an email. Then, send the email to me no later than 9 a.m. Monday to omars@msu.edu, with the subject line of law quiz.
This is a closed-book quiz; please take it after reading the ethics
chapter and blog post, but DO NOT use those materials while actually
taking the quiz.
No,
I can't make sure you're being honest. But journalists are only as good
as their integrity. Ethics are what you do when no one is looking,
right? So, don't cheat.
Here are your questions, to be answered in a true/false format:
1. The right of the press and public to attend judicial proceedings can never be abridged.
2.
The federal government and all state governments have laws that open
public meetings and records, but the laws contain many exemptions.
3. Under modern libel law, plaintiffs must prove the falsity of the defamatory statements.
4.
Actual malice, which public figures who sue for libel must prove, means
the reporter or publisher intended to harm the plaintiff.
5. Journalists have an absolute right of access to crime, accident or disaster scenes.
6.
One way reporters protect themselves against libel suits is by
identifying the people they write about as precisely as possible, using
name, age and address.
7.
The U.S. Supreme Court has approved the practice of allowing reporters
to ride along with police on drug busts or other arrests.
8.
News organizations always escape liability for defamatory statements if
they prove they accurately quoted defamatory charges made by other
people.
9.
Information drawn from public records, such as property tax information
or court documents, can never be the basis for a lawsuit over publicity
to private facts.
10. The major common-law defenses to libel suits are truth, fair-report privilege and harmless error.
11. Such things as interviewing acquaintances and examining public records do not constitute intrusion on a person's privacy.
12.
Defamatory statements are those that lower a person's reputation in the
community or deter others from associating or doing business with that
person.
13. A private individual who is a libel plaintiff must prove actual malice to win punitive damages.
14. The U.S. Supreme Court has said most people who become public figures for purposes of a libel suit do so involuntarily.
15. The plaintiff in a false light privacy lawsuit does not have to prove injury to reputation.
16.
Statements of opinion may be protected from libel suits, so long as the
statements are not based on or do not imply false facts about the
plaintiff.
17.
The U.S. Supreme Court has said reporters cannot be subpoenaed by
courts or grand juries to testify about confidential sources and
information.
Tuesday, August 4, 2015
Ethics: A Quiz!
What I would like you to do is to answer the following questions in an email. Then, send the email to me no later than 9 a.m. Monday to omars@msu.edu, with the subject line of ethics quiz.
This is a closed-book quiz; please take it after reading the ethics
chapter and blog post, but DO NOT use those materials while actually
taking the quiz.
No, I can't make sure you're being honest. But journalists are only as good as their integrity. Ethics are what you do when no one is looking, right? So, don't cheat.
Here are your questions, to be answered in a true/false format:
1. Many reporter decisions have unintended and long-term consequences.
2. A question to ask when making an ethical decision is, "Does this decision fit the kind of journalism I believe in and the way people should treat one another?"
3. Two important questions to ask when facing ethical decisions are "Who will be hurt, and how many?" and "Who will be helped, and how many?"
4. Deciding which side to present first in a story is a value judgment.
5. Managing editors encourage their journalists to become involved in city politics.
6. It is usually all right for reporters to interfere with police procedures.
7. News stories often are the sources of a second wound to victims.
8. The mirco issue is the main reason for publishing or airing a story.
9. Good journalists are also compassionate journalists.
10. It is ethical to lie about being a reporter when the result is a good story.
11. It is now acceptable to publish the names of all juvenile defenders.
12. Gossip is a good source for news topics.
13. Journalists must learn to recognize their biases.
14. Professional organizations can compel members to follow their ethics codes.
15. Being ethical means being able to distinguish between right and wrong.
No, I can't make sure you're being honest. But journalists are only as good as their integrity. Ethics are what you do when no one is looking, right? So, don't cheat.
Here are your questions, to be answered in a true/false format:
1. Many reporter decisions have unintended and long-term consequences.
2. A question to ask when making an ethical decision is, "Does this decision fit the kind of journalism I believe in and the way people should treat one another?"
3. Two important questions to ask when facing ethical decisions are "Who will be hurt, and how many?" and "Who will be helped, and how many?"
4. Deciding which side to present first in a story is a value judgment.
5. Managing editors encourage their journalists to become involved in city politics.
6. It is usually all right for reporters to interfere with police procedures.
7. News stories often are the sources of a second wound to victims.
8. The mirco issue is the main reason for publishing or airing a story.
9. Good journalists are also compassionate journalists.
10. It is ethical to lie about being a reporter when the result is a good story.
11. It is now acceptable to publish the names of all juvenile defenders.
12. Gossip is a good source for news topics.
13. Journalists must learn to recognize their biases.
14. Professional organizations can compel members to follow their ethics codes.
15. Being ethical means being able to distinguish between right and wrong.
Ethics: 9/11's Falling Man, The Buzzard And The Girl, The Burn Victim
There's a fine line between showing readers the brutal truth of a
situation so that they understand the powerful truth of any story, and
showing readers a truth so brutal that readers ignore the point you were
trying to make and instead question your judgment.
I can think of no better example of this than the so-called "Falling Man" photo, taken by an Associated Press photographer during the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks and published by The New York Times the next day.
This remarkable article from Esquire Magazine in 2003 offers a summation of the complex and contradictory forces at play in deciding if running the image was the absolute right thing or the incredibly wrong thing to do.
If you were an editor on Sept. 11, what would you have done? And why?
Likewise, what would you do if you were a photographer covering an African famine and you came across a starving girl being stalked by a vulture? That was a real-world decision for one photog, and it may have led to his own unfortunate end.
Finally, what would you do if you were the photographer who took this award-winning pic of this badly-burned girl in the Vietnam War?
Look carefully at each picture; read each link carefully and in its entirety; and then let's talk it out.
What I'd like you to do for each photo is to answer the following questions for each of the three photos and scenarios:
-- Do you agree with the course of action actually taken by the photojournalist? Why or why not? Cite ethical values we've discussed in the blog and read in the ethics chapter.
-- What you would have done and why if you were the photographer? Cite ethical values we've discussed in the blog and read in the ethics chapter.
Again, the photos and scenarios (for which all the links are above) are:
-- The 9/11 "Falling Man" pic
-- The starving girl/vulture pic
-- the Vietnam War girl pic
Then email me your answers for each of the three photos and scenarios no later than 9 a.m. Monday to omars@msu.edu, under the subject line of ethical decisions.
I want to hear what you think, and why. I'm not looking for simply your personal opinions; I'm looking for your professional opinions, based on what we've learned and what we believe in as journalists and as human beings.
I can think of no better example of this than the so-called "Falling Man" photo, taken by an Associated Press photographer during the Sept. 11, 2001 terror attacks and published by The New York Times the next day.
This remarkable article from Esquire Magazine in 2003 offers a summation of the complex and contradictory forces at play in deciding if running the image was the absolute right thing or the incredibly wrong thing to do.
If you were an editor on Sept. 11, what would you have done? And why?
Likewise, what would you do if you were a photographer covering an African famine and you came across a starving girl being stalked by a vulture? That was a real-world decision for one photog, and it may have led to his own unfortunate end.
Finally, what would you do if you were the photographer who took this award-winning pic of this badly-burned girl in the Vietnam War?
Look carefully at each picture; read each link carefully and in its entirety; and then let's talk it out.
What I'd like you to do for each photo is to answer the following questions for each of the three photos and scenarios:
-- Do you agree with the course of action actually taken by the photojournalist? Why or why not? Cite ethical values we've discussed in the blog and read in the ethics chapter.
-- What you would have done and why if you were the photographer? Cite ethical values we've discussed in the blog and read in the ethics chapter.
Again, the photos and scenarios (for which all the links are above) are:
-- The 9/11 "Falling Man" pic
-- The starving girl/vulture pic
-- the Vietnam War girl pic
Then email me your answers for each of the three photos and scenarios no later than 9 a.m. Monday to omars@msu.edu, under the subject line of ethical decisions.
I want to hear what you think, and why. I'm not looking for simply your personal opinions; I'm looking for your professional opinions, based on what we've learned and what we believe in as journalists and as human beings.
JRN 200: Speaking Of Ethics ...
... we're having an ethical problem in this class as of late.
A huge part of journalistic ethics is avoiding the appearance of a conflict of interest; that is, not reporting on people and places to which we have a personal or professional connection or interest.
So, if we're dating a basketball player, we should never write about the basketball team. If our sister is on student government, then that topic is off-limits. If we're in an anti-coal group, we should never write about coal specifically or energy in general.
That's because it's hard to be convincingly objective if we have a stake in the outcome. Common sense dictates that we won't be as critical of our friends, relatives and associations as we would be outside ones. There are few things as destructive to credibility as inside connections like those.
On the first multimedia assignment, I allowed conflict-of-interest waivers ON THAT ASSIGNMENT ONLY so you could get your feet wet in new mediums. For all other assignments, I assumed you would understand traditional conflict of interest rules would apply.
That assumption of mine was wrong. Many people had clear conflicts of interest in the second multimedia assignment. More troubling, some people had clear conflicts of interest in their second out-of-class stories (which never had such a waiver!).
Not only is it a clear violation of journalistic ethics, it defeats efforts to teach you necessary skills, like identifying and locating sources (which is harder to do when you don't already know them) and getting them to talk (likewise) and learning about entirely new subjects while on deadline (which is the vast majority of journalism; we don't have the luxury of picking-and-choosing things to report on; we report on what is necessary at the moment.)
(For example, on 9/11 journalists didn't have the luxury of talking to their own friends and relatives or changing the story topic; they had to talk to friends and relatives of people who just died, and they had to stick to the topic of global terrorism having come to the U.S., whether or not to subject was previously familiar to them. And did I mention this was all on a immediate deadline?)
So, let me be clear now: from here on out, no conflicts of interest allowed on any assignment. The penalty for having a conflict of interest will be the same as a fatal: an automatic 1.0. If you need help in determining whether something or someone is a conflict of interest, it's your responsibility to contact me before the assignment is due.
Monday, August 3, 2015
Out-Of-Class #3: We Bring It All Together
That's because the third out-of-classer won't simply be a written story; instead, we will be filing versions for all mediums.
Due on the same topic will be:
... a written story, for which the topic must be pre-approved by me, via tip sheet; the story must be at least 700 words long; you need to note the word count at the end of the story; the story should include at least three sources who you have personally interviewed. Three is the bare minimum, but I expect to see many more than that; and you should try to incorporate at least one neutral expert, as noted in the syllabus.
Also, on a separate page, attach a source sheet where you list by name, title, phone number and email address each interview source you communicated with. I will be randomly spot-checking sources to check your accuracy and make sure you spoke to whom you claim to have spoken.
Plus, keep in mind you will have the opportunity to do an optional rewrite of your story, after the graded version is returned to you. To earn credit for a rewrite, you must do additional reporting and rewriting, as suggested by me. Then, your initial grade and rewrite grade are averaged, and that average becomes your final assignment grade;
... a 1-2 minute video, uploaded to YouTube, with B-roll and at least two source interviews on-tape; on either the entire comprehensive story or simply one aspect or angle of it.
... a 100-200-word preview or one side of the story, posted to blogger.com and done in a journalistic style, taking a look at the issue going into your reporting or one side of the issue, with at least two relevant working hyperlinks embedded in the text;
... a 100-200-word recap or other side of the story, posted to blogger.com and done in a journalistic style, taking a look at what you discovered about the issue/how it ended or another side of the issue, with at least two relevant working hyperlinks embedded in the text;
... and a tweet stream on Twitter with at least 12 tweets on the subject, and a unifying hash tag applied to each tweet.
For this exercise, you may re-interview sources from your written stories or interview new sources. You may also use what you gathered and your notes from your original stories in putting together your new media news products.
Also, when I say you can do the entire comprehensive story or just an aspect of it, this is what I mean: let's say you did a story on the pros and cons of living off-campus vs. on-campus. The video and tweet stream may just look at one aspect, such as student opinions on the issue. The preview online story might look at the experiences of on-campus residents; with the recap looking at off-campus viewpoints. None of the mediums necessarily have to look at the issue as broadly as you did in a traditional text story (though you may do so if you so choose).
There will be separate deadlines for the print and multimedia versions of your stories. The deadline for the written and multimedia versions of the of the story will be no later than 9 a.m. Monday, Aug. 17 via email to omars@msu.edu under the subject line of OOC3. Please include links to all the multimedia products in the email. You will not have a rewrite opportunity for this out-of-classer; please consider it a final exam of sorts.
The deadline for the optional fourth out-of-class story, your job shadow report and all extra credit work will be no later than 9 a.m. Thursday, Aug. 20 via email to omars@msu.edu.
That will be the last day of class, and no work will be accepted after that date and time.
JRN 200: Your Turn To Grade Me!
From MSU, sent to me, forwarded to you. Please follow the link and fill out the survey on this class ASAP. (Yes, I really do read these and take the feedback -- whether good or bad -- seriously, so please do the survey. And thanks!)
Student Instruction Rating System (SIRS Online) collects student feedback on courses and instruction at MSU. Student Instructional Rating System (SIRS Online) forms will be available for your students to submit feedback during the dates indicated:
JRN 200 730: 8/2/2015 - 9/1/2015 (SIRS only)
Direct students to https://sirsonline.msu.edu.
Students are required to complete the SIRS Online form OR indicate within that form that they decline to participate. Otherwise, final grades (for courses using SIRS Online) will be sequestered for seven days following the course grade submission deadline for this semester.
SIRS Online rating summaries are available to instructors and department chairs after 9/1/2015 at https://sirsonline.msu.edu. Instructors should provide copies of the rating summaries to graduate assistants who assisted in teaching their course(s). Rating information collected by SIRS Online is reported in summary form only and cannot be linked to individual student responses. Student anonymity is carefully protected.
JRN 200: A Reminder Of My Availability
I will NOT be available for in-person office hours for
the remainder of the summer, because I will be out of the office for
the remainder of the summer. That also means I will not be available via
my land line phone number of 517-432-3009, as listed in the syllabus.
However, that does NOT mean I won't be available to you to address your needs and concerns. During regular weekday business hours you may call me on my cell at 702-271-7983, and even text questions to that number of that's easier. (Please don't forget to include your name on there so I can know who the heck is texting me).
I'll also still be available at my email address of omars@msu.edu. That's the address at which I want you to keep turning in your assignments, but I suspect I'll respond more quickly to texts to my phone than emails if you have questions or concerns.
So, in short, I'll still be available, at the same email address but a new phone number and not in-office. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me and I'd be happy to address 'em.
However, that does NOT mean I won't be available to you to address your needs and concerns. During regular weekday business hours you may call me on my cell at 702-271-7983, and even text questions to that number of that's easier. (Please don't forget to include your name on there so I can know who the heck is texting me).
I'll also still be available at my email address of omars@msu.edu. That's the address at which I want you to keep turning in your assignments, but I suspect I'll respond more quickly to texts to my phone than emails if you have questions or concerns.
So, in short, I'll still be available, at the same email address but a new phone number and not in-office. If you have any further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me and I'd be happy to address 'em.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)