Summary Of Mcginniss's Code Of Ethics
Not only did McGinniss disregarded his ethics as a journalist, but he also tarnished and affected negatively MacDonald’s reputation and culpability. First, according to the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), one of the first codes of ethics under the “Minimize Harm” section, says: “Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by news coverage.” McGinniss clearly violated the code, he first did not have the compassion to lessen the impact that his book will have in MacDonald’s incrimination and “essential integrity”. In fact, eight years later when the suit MacDonald-McGinniss occurred, MacDonald claimed that the “‘essential integrity’ of his life story has not been maintained in McGinniss’s book, and McGinniss was guilty
…show more content…
Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story.” The code speaks to the MacDonald-McGinniss’s case, McGinniss of course opted for an undercover method to gather the information he needed for the book, which was lying to MacDonald about believing in his innocence. “Dr. Elliot” said that “I certainly don’t believe that journalists have to lie and misrepresent in order to get someone to work with them. Also, I think that such duplicity casts grave doubts on what is written” (Malcolm 88), McGinniss’s duplicity does, by a fact, casts shadows because, as the ethics codes states it, if unorthodox methods, such as going undercover or other “surreptitious” methods, are necessary in order to get the information, then the use of such methods “should be explained as part of the story.” And explaining his undercover methods as part of his story was something McGinniss seemed to have disregarded. In the case of “ABC vs. Food Lion,” when ABC went uncover to reveal the violation of several sanity codes in distinct Food Lion supermarkets, Mike Wallace from 60 Minutes commented that there are always other forms to get the information without lying, unless it is very critical, “I can see the circumstance if there’s a nuclear explosion or a huge terrorist incident. But spoiled fish? No.” The same form applies to MacDonald-McGinniss’s case, the only critical thing for McGinniss was reproducing an earlier success in his literary career: a
Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story.” The code speaks to the MacDonald-McGinniss’s case, McGinniss of course opted for an undercover method to gather the information he needed for the book, which was lying to MacDonald about believing in his innocence. “Dr. Elliot” said that “I certainly don’t believe that journalists have to lie and misrepresent in order to get someone to work with them. Also, I think that such duplicity casts grave doubts on what is written” (Malcolm 88), McGinniss’s duplicity does, by a fact, casts shadows because, as the ethics codes states it, if unorthodox methods, such as going undercover or other “surreptitious” methods, are necessary in order to get the information, then the use of such methods “should be explained as part of the story.” And explaining his undercover methods as part of his story was something McGinniss seemed to have disregarded. In the case of “ABC vs. Food Lion,” when ABC went uncover to reveal the violation of several sanity codes in distinct Food Lion supermarkets, Mike Wallace from 60 Minutes commented that there are always other forms to get the information without lying, unless it is very critical, “I can see the circumstance if there’s a nuclear explosion or a huge terrorist incident. But spoiled fish? No.” The same form applies to MacDonald-McGinniss’s case, the only critical thing for McGinniss was reproducing an earlier success in his literary career: a