There is indeed a grain of truth in the above statement, journalism ethics does require careful decision making. However, it would have been ideal if conscientious decision could be applied to all contexts. Journalists can be said to be the moral agents of societies. They act as watchdogs or ‘newshounds’, as well as active collectors and disseminators of information (Deuze 2004). Moreover, their job entails certain obligations and their goal, which is the seeking of truth and communicating it to the world can be a difficult one. As stated by Shriver (1998, cited in Starck 2001), “journalists wrestle daily to give order and meaning to the endless and confusing flow of human experience.” It can be very challenging for journalists to make the right decisions in the right situations, due to both internal and external factors affecting them. The aim of this essay, thus discusses whether or not it is possible for ethical journalists to make conscientious decisions in all contexts.
It is said that decision making does not arise solely due to motivational factors (Brehmer & Hammond, 1977, cited in Valenti 1998); there are many internal and external factors that can influence decision making. Some of the internal factors that can affect journalists’ perception of situations and the way they ultimately take decisions could be the values, attitudes, and beliefs, as well as religious and moral beliefs instilled in them (Granberg, 1982, cited in Valenti 1998). Besides, internal factors are deemed important in decision making since, researchers have reported about the “dependence on internal thought processes by editors and reporters to resolve ethical dilemmas” (McAdams 1986). Nonetheless, can journalists solve ethical problems in a social vacuum, relying only on internal moral reasoning? This is certainly not possible. There are many external factors that influence journalists’ decisions, for example codes of ethics, competitive influence, organizational environment, newsroom socialization among others that can have decisive imprints on certain ethical decisions. These external factors sometimes act as significant guidelines that journalists follow while shaping their news and it can be very challenging to report under such pressures.
As stated above, the profession of journalists requires truth seeking and truth telling. It is often believed that to be able to tell a story accurately and objectively, there is the need for journalists to abide by the codes of ethics. Ethics is one of the most researched and debated issue in journalism due to its controversial nature. While some believe that codes of ethics are “unneeded constraint on freedom” (Merrill, 1989, cited in Boeyink 1998), others, believe that it promotes “consistency and fairness, to minimize harm to sources, and to promote truthfulness” (Boeyink, 1990). However, in this case, the pertinent question that arises is whether or not these codes of ethics can be applied to all situations and at all time. Scholars like, Starck (2001) criticize the expanding volume of research in journalism ethics, particularly for its “lack of cross-cultural perspective”, and lament the “apparent gap between theory and practice in the field” (Deuze 2004). In the same line of thought, the managing editor of The Courier- Journal, Stephen Ford, argued that code of ethics “help us focus on what we are doing and why we are doing it, however, I don't think they're absolute Bibles of right” (Boeyink 1998). This shows that ethics can be subjective and we also understand that codes of ethics are not the ‘be all and end all’ of journalism. They do help journalists make decisions about what to report and how to report without bias, however, the code of ethics do not help in answering all questions and it does not solve dilemmas in all contexts.
It is a fact that the media is a fast-paced, deadline-oriented profession where the...