Media Ethics in a South African Context
1.1 WHAT IS MEDIA ETHICS?
“It is often said that the media exist to inform, educate and entertain. Sometimes, however, the informing and educating functions are subordinated to the entertainment function. It often seems to be the case that what is salacious, sensational or horrific is judged to be entertaining and therefore preferable to a simple statement of facts. Can such colouring of the facts be justified?” Wilfrid McGreal and Bernard Hoose
The branch of philosophy related to human behaviour, more specifically focussing on what is morally acceptable or morally unacceptable, is a discipline better known as media ethics. In essence, media ethics provides guidelines to media workers which help and guide them to make morally acceptable decisions (Oosthuizen 2002:12).
1.2 META-ETHICS AND NORMATIVE ETHICS
As a philosophical discipline, ethics fundamentally can be split into theoretical, and practical ethics. Theoretical ethics focuses on questions about ethical values ' origins, justification and evaluation – more specifically meta-ethics and normative ethics and practical ethics focuses on their application to specific issues. Focussing more specifically on theoretical ethics, meta-ethics wants to determine what moral concepts mean and whether moral statements are justifiable while normative ethics focuses on actual ethical conduct and the moral principles that underlie the principles and then they use these principles in specific situations to determine which actions are moral and immoral (Dixon 2006).
Meta-ethics
According to Merrill and Odell (1983), meta-ethics focuses on analysing and evaluating ethical theories. In other words, meta-ethics attempts to determine the meaning of moral concepts and phrases; whether or not these phases are given moral, immoral or logical justification; and how they are classified. This broad classification of meta-ethical theories, is made up of teleological ethics and deontological ethics. Teleological ethics
“It is often said that the media exist to inform, educate and entertain. Sometimes, however, the informing and educating functions are subordinated to the entertainment function. It often seems to be the case that what is salacious, sensational or horrific is judged to be entertaining and therefore preferable to a simple statement of facts. Can such colouring of the facts be justified?” Wilfrid McGreal and Bernard Hoose
The branch of philosophy related to human behaviour, more specifically focussing on what is morally acceptable or morally unacceptable, is a discipline better known as media ethics. In essence, media ethics provides guidelines to media workers which help and guide them to make morally acceptable decisions (Oosthuizen 2002:12).
1.2 META-ETHICS AND NORMATIVE ETHICS
As a philosophical discipline, ethics fundamentally can be split into theoretical, and practical ethics. Theoretical ethics focuses on questions about ethical values ' origins, justification and evaluation – more specifically meta-ethics and normative ethics and practical ethics focuses on their application to specific issues. Focussing more specifically on theoretical ethics, meta-ethics wants to determine what moral concepts mean and whether moral statements are justifiable while normative ethics focuses on actual ethical conduct and the moral principles that underlie the principles and then they use these principles in specific situations to determine which actions are moral and immoral (Dixon 2006).
Meta-ethics
According to Merrill and Odell (1983), meta-ethics focuses on analysing and evaluating ethical theories. In other words, meta-ethics attempts to determine the meaning of moral concepts and phrases; whether or not these phases are given moral, immoral or logical justification; and how they are classified. This broad classification of meta-ethical theories, is made up of teleological ethics and deontological ethics. Teleological ethics
Bibliography: • Dixon, M. Ethics and Ethical Analysis. 2006. [Online]. Available: http://austin.onu.edu/~mdixon/handouts/ethical%20analysis.html • Geivett, R.D • Johnson, R.N. Deontological Ethics. 2006 [Online]. Available: http://showme.missouri.edu/~philrnj/deon.html • Lent Series 2006: A Sense of Ethics • Lowenstein, R.L. & Merrill, J.C. 1990. Macromedia. Mission, message and morality. New York: Longman • Merrill, J.C • Merrill, J.C. 1989. The dialectic in journalism. Towards a responsible use of press freedom. Baton Rouge: Louisiana State University Press • Mundt, W.R • Oosthuizen, L.M. 2002. Communication ethics. Only study guide for COM308-f. Pretoria: University of South Africa • Oosthuizen, L.M • Oosthuizen, L.M. 1989. Media policy and ethics. Cape Town: Juta & Co. • Oosthuizen, L.M. & Qakisa, M. 1996. ‘New World Information Order’ in L.M. Oosthuizen (ed), Introduction to communication, Course Book 5, Journalism, Press and Radio Studies. Cape Town: Juta & Co. • White, R.A. 1989. ‘Social and Political factors in the development of communication ethics’ in T.W. Cooper (ed), Communication ethics and global change. White Plains, NY: Longman