Board Troubles

Case Study, , , , , , ,

provenience.in image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

A publisher, at the top of a media organization’s pecking order, might scold underlings for stepping out of line ethically.

But who scolds a publisher?

That is one of the underlying issues brought to AdviceLine where publishers and other high-ranking editors decide to serve on the boards of outside groups, including civic organizations.

Civic organizations typically hope this cozy relationship with media leaders will result in publicity. For media leaders, it often is seen as a way to serve and create ties with the community.

But is it a good idea? It can lead to trouble.

The publisher of a Tennessee newspaper called AdviceLine, saying: “I have a difficult confidentiality problem.”

The publisher was a member of the board of directors for an international nonprofit fundraising organization. In an emergency board meeting, the publisher learned from the organization’s new executive director that the former executive director failed to file federal tax forms by the time required.

Penalties owed

The penalty for such an oversight is $90 a day, and the organization already owes the federal government more than $20,000. Failure to file the tax forms and pay the penalty before a looming deadline could result in a bigger fine and loss of the organization’s nonprofit status.

As far as anyone could tell, no fraud was involved, just wretched administration, terrible book-keeping and poor audits. The nonprofit organization has enough cash on hand to pay the penalty in time to avoid any further losses. But that was money intended for local charities and other worthy groups in a cash-strapped rural area.

The board’s immediate actions will include paying the penalty, getting the organization’s financial records audited and deciding when and how to explain all of this to the public.

A complicating factor is that a fund raising drive is now under way. Donors might be less generous if they knew of the nonprofit organization’s tax, financial and management problems.

Publish now or later?

The publisher asked AdviceLine if he would be acting ethically if he refrains from publishing what he knows immediately? Can he wait until the problems are fixed?

“We talked at length about benefit and harm,” the AdviceLine adviser wrote in his case report. The publisher’s reasoning mirrored the adviser’s.

“Although the public will be much upset at this, and at the misapplication of their previous contributions, the cause of that has been remedied already by the arrival of the new, and competent, executive director.

“So there is no great loss to the public in not knowing this right at this time, whereas there is good reason to believe that, even with the corrective action already taken…many people might reduce their contributions and many potential beneficiaries of (the organization) might suffer accordingly.

Benefit and harm

“That is, reporting this matter right now seems to produce more harm than benefit to the public.”

The adviser adds, however, that all of that depends on whether the board and the executive director took the corrective actions needed, then reported the situation to the public.

If they failed to do that, “then there would be a story that would then need to be told promptly; but that is not yet the situation.” The publisher does not expect that situation to arise because the board is determined to act properly and promptly, “including proper notification of the public when all the facts are in order and all the remediation with the feds has been attended to.”

The publisher has one additional concern: In preserving the board’s confidentiality, he might appear to the board, and later to the public, “to be involved in covering up something that, as a journalist, he should have reported.”

The reasoning

Said the AdviceLine adviser: “But I told him that the reasoning we had just gone through was the appropriate benefit-harm reasoning for the case from a professional ethics point of view, and in fact that the principles supporting this would be found (in general terms only, however) in the SPJ (Society of Professional Journalists) code” of ethics.”

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists has a team of four ethicists, all of whom teach or taught ethics in universities. They meet periodically to review advice that was given to journalists who called or query AdviceLine for guidance.

In this case, several ethicists vehemently disagreed with the advice that was given. They pointed out that one of the main themes of the SPJ code of ethics is to seek the truth and report it.

Ethics tricky

This case helps to underscore that even professional ethicists do not always agree on what is an ethical course of action. Ethics is tricky business, especially when  applied to journalism.

The ethicist involved in the case accurately spelled out the benefit-harm reasoning often used to resolve ethics problems. But in this case, it could be argued that it led to a debatable conclusion.

The opposing ethicists pointed out that the public had a right to know immediately how money donated for charity and other worthy causes was being managed.

No doubt, the nonprofit organization with management problems would be embarrassed by such disclosures. But the publisher in this case failed to recognize where his greatest  loyalties lie: To the public. And he does risk being seen as a participant in a coverup, as he feared.

In a jam

He got himself in this jam by serving on that nonprofit organization’s board of directors. This is not a rare or isolated ethics issue.

The Washington Post recently reported that NBC News Group chairman, Cesar Conde, is a member of Walmart and PepsiCo’s corporate boards – for which he earned $595,018 in 2022 in cash and stock.

There’s no evidence that Conde has been involved with any NBC stories about the two outside corporations, but the Post said “the arrangement has raised some ethical concerns, and reveals a potential blind spot for a news business usually very serious about conflicts — real or perceived.”

The headline on the Post story read: “Outside roles by NBC’s Conde, others reveal a journalism ethics issue: being paid to sit on boards.” Others include CNN’s chief executive and Amazon founder Jeff Bezos, owner of the Washington Post.

Paid positions

Paying news executives to sit on corporate boards brings the issue to a new level of concern. They amount to paid jobs.

Typically, editors and publishers serve as volunteers on the boards of local school or civic organizations. A similar case in which an editor asked AdviceLine for help led to some guidelines that could be useful.

An editor for the Mankato Free Press in Minnesota asked about the wisdom of editors joining civic groups.

In that case, the AdviceLine adviser said the first rule should be to avoid influencing, or interfering with, reporting on civic organizations – as was done in the Tennessee nonprofit organization case.

The Free Press editor was concerned that editors and publishers schmoozing with community power brokers sends a mixed message to reporters – that it looks like editors are breaking the traditional barriers between the editorial and business departments.

Staff feedback

In the Mankato case, AdviceLine urged the editor to discuss the situation with her staff to get feedback on how best to avoid compromising the paper’s standards.

This is a good ethics strategy: Get everyone involved in thinking about what is good for the organization. They become part of reaching solutions.

Later, AdviceLine called the Free Press editor to ask what happened in this case.

The newspaper was bought by another media company, which had a corporate handbook. It encouraged journalists to “participate in worthwhile community activities, so long as they do not compromise the credibility of news coverage or the independence of the newspaper.

“Avoid involvement in organizations or activities that could create a conflict of interest or an appearance of conflict.”

It helps to have written corporate policies that are known and understood by the staff, and by management, who sometimes think ethics rules don’t apply to them.

******************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

April Fooling

Case Study, , , ,

techuloid.com image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

Days are officially recognized for every occasion, so why not for fools or foolishness?

That seems reason enough for April Fools’ Day, usually April 1 each year.

Historians say it’s been celebrated for several centuries by different cultures, though its exact origins are a mystery. One theory is that it dates to 1582, when France switched from the Julian calendar to the Gregorian calendar. People who were slow to recognize the calendar changes by the last week of March through April 1 became the butt of jokes and hoaxes and were called “April Fools.”

A tradition lingers

That tradition continued into modern times, sometimes with yelling “April Fool” at the victim of the jokes and hoaxes. People seem to enjoy making others look foolish.

Media have done their share of keeping April Fool traditions alive by playing pranks on readers and viewers.

In 1957, the British Broadcasting Corp. reported that Swiss farmers were having a record spaghetti crop and showed footage of people harvesting noodles from trees. That was clearly a joke.

But some hoaxes were frightening.

A Halloween episode

“The War of the Worlds” was a 1938 Halloween radio episode by The Mercury Theater on the Air directed and narrated by Orson Welles as an adaptation of the H.G. Wells novel of the same name. The episode is famous for inciting panic among listeners by reporting in breaking news style that Martians were invading New Jersey with towering “war machines.”

Welles, 23-years-old at the time, ended the 30-minute broadcast by saying it was a spoof, comparing the show to “dressing up in a sheet and jumping out of a bush and saying ‘boo!'” The show caused widespread outrage. Welles said he got the idea for the program from the BBC, which broadcast a fictitious story about Communists seizing London. A bigger story, Welles thought, would be aliens from outer space.

It was inevitable that the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists would be called and asked if this kind of prank journalism is ethical.

168-mile fast ball

The April 1, 1985 edition of Sports Illustrated magazine carried a story by the late George Plimpton saying that a New York Mets rookie pitcher named Siddhartha (Sidd) Finch could throw a baseball 168 miles an hour.

It was a hoax, and Sports Illustrated later admitted that the story was an April Fools’ joke. Some called it the greatest April Fools’ joke in sports.

Plimpton was famous for taking turns as a Yankee baseball pitcher, a Baltimore Colts football player and boxing Archie Moore — then writing about the experience from an amateur’s viewpoint. It was an example of what today might be described as participatory journalism. Plimpton did a lot of that.

A sports publication journalist called the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists, saying he had an idea for an April Fools’ Day story in the Plimpton tradition, but wanted to know if that would be ethical.

The AdviceLine adviser remembered the story about fireball pitcher Sidd Finch, and was skeptical at the time he saw it in 1985.

Plimpton’s reputation

“This was due to the very well-known reputation of Plimpton as a writer who went in for bizarre experiences and writing having to do with sports,” said the adviser, who also recalled that Plimpton and Sports Illustrated at the time “came in for little serious criticism once the hoax was divulged.”

Most readers thought it was “fun” in keeping with the kind of work Plimpton did during his career. But the adviser suggested that, just like fastball pitchers, not all writers can deliver a change-up:

“Without this background and past reputation, a true journalist risks his/her reputation and the reputation of his/her news media using this device. A direct answer is, the creation or promulgation of a known false story is unethical, Plimpton notwithstanding.”

And, the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics urges journalists to “seek truth and report it.” The public expects media to present facts, not hoaxes, unless they appear in the entertainment or comics sections. That would give fair warning of foolishness.

**************************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago Professional Chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional Journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Bully Advertiser

Case Study,

digichoice.in image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

Advertisers sometimes make demands and threats.

It’s common for advertisers to push ideas for stories about their products on the editorial staff, said the editor of an interior design magazine. 

But one advertiser was so extreme, she called AdviceLine for advice.

“They have an advertiser bully who is demanding that they write stories promoting the bully’s products,” the AdviceLine adviser wrote in the case report. If the magazine refused, the advertiser threatened to cancel his ad account, worth $30,000, one of the magazine’s largest accounts.

A long-time client

The advertiser told the ad sales team that he has been a long-time client and “deserves something in return,” suggesting that competing publications offer such incentives.

The magazine’s ad team agrees that the advertiser’s requests are wrong, but they are desperate to keep his account. Meanwhile, the magazine’s publisher suggests publishing a story that looks like “sponsored content,” but the demanding advertiser will not be asked to pay for it.

Typically, the magazine writes sponsored content, then asks advertisers to sponsor the story and identifies the sponsor. But that would not happen with the demanding advertiser, “since the publisher’s idea is to placate the client/bully.”

Quickly agree

In her report on this case, the AdviceLine adviser said: “We quickly agreed that both the bully’s request and the publishers resolution were unethical.”

The editor was not in doubt about that, but wondered if AdviceLine could suggest practical advice about how to navigate the situation. The adviser said:

“I suggested reminding the publisher and the client/bully about the sensible reasons behind their editorial policy and the dangers to everyone if they violate them (readers lose faith, other advertisers demand similar payback deals, etc.)

Good reasons

“A conversation about the good reasons behind the policy enables her to stand her ground without directly accusing the publisher or the advertising client of wrongdoing, which can sometimes reduce tensions and promote clearer thinking. She thought she would try that.”

The editor’s in-house conversations so far had mostly focused on her reasons for not wanting to do what the client was asking, so it felt like a “me against them” conversation instead of a “what’s the right thing to do” conversation. The adviser added:

“I also raised the possibility that the client/bully could be bluffing, so standing their ground might not result in a lost account. When she asked, I also told her she could mention the fact that she spoke with me and I shared her concerns.”

Publisher’s response

The adviser and the editor also talked about the possibility that her publisher would not take no for an answer. The adviser said:

“It sounds like she would resign if she had to, so then we talked about the ethics surrounding that. I acknowledged the temptation to broadcast her reasons if she resigned, but recommended that she just cite a difference of editorial policy and focus on what her own policies are regarding journalistic integrity, rather than sharing the details of the case. She agreed that there isn’t a compelling need for whistle blowing here.

“I don’t think I really helped her see anything she didn’t know already, but she said it helped her to talk through it since, while it’s a relatively ‘easy’ issue ethically, it’s potentially a tough one for her magazine financially.”

********************************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Privacy in a Pandemic

Case Study, , , , ,

http://www.unothegateway.com image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

The Covid-19 pandemic commanded the world’s attention, straining medical resources and testing the media’s competence to understand and accurately report such an unprecedented event. 

As often happens in major events, journalists try to tell the story by describing what is happening to individuals. They try to “humanize” the story to describe the suffering of patients and brave attempts by doctors and nurses to treat the highly communicable disease, which struck down caregivers.

The death toll was one of the highest in pandemic history. The World Health Organization reports 7 million coronavirus deaths worldwide, from Dec. 31, 2019 to Feb. 4, 2024. With 1.2 million deaths, the United States had more covid casualties than any nation, despite having one of the most advanced health care systems in the world. Brazil was next with 702,000 deaths, followed by India with 533,500.

A horrifying story

It was a dramatic and horrifying story. And one that tested the ethical conduct of journalists. Although their intentions were good, did some of them go too far?

A British Broadcasting Corporation reporter based in Ho Chi Minh City contacted AdviceLine asking: “Should journalists enter an operating room where doctors are rescuing a critical patient just to have a good story?” Doctors consented to a story, with photos, in a hospital in Vietnam. But did their actions “undermine the patient’s privacy?”

The BBC reporter said the patient, an airline pilot, gained notoriety because his case was considered so rare in severity, “every minute detail of his recovery was reported in national newspapers and on TV news bulletins.”

Patient privacy

The case raises questions dealing with a patient’s privacy rights, and how much the public needs to know in a global public health crisis.

The AdviceLine adviser in this case was Joseph Mathewson, who teaches journalism law and ethics at Northwestern University’s Medill School of Journalism, Media & Integrated Marketing Communications.

Mathewson first turned to BBC editorial guidelines on privacy, which state: “We must be able to demonstrate why an infringement of privacy is justified, and, when using the public interest to justify an infringement, consideration should be given to proportionality; the greater the intrusion, the greater the public interest required to justify it.”

Guidelines

The guidelines went on to say: “We must be able to justify an infringement of an individual’s privacy without their consent by demonstrating that the intrusion is outweighed by the public interest…. We must balance the public interest in the full and accurate reporting of stories involving human suffering and distress with an individual’s privacy and respect for their human dignity.”

In this case, it was not known if the patient consented to be interviewed and photographed. Without consent, said Mathewson, “the journalist then needs to weigh the public interest in that infringement to determine whether it was warranted.”

Broadcasting code

The United Kingdom also has a broadcasting code with similar restrictions that take public interest into account, adding: “Examples of public interest would include revealing or detecting crime, protecting public health or safety, exposing misleading claims made by individuals or organizations or disclosing incompetence that affects the public.”

Mathewson observed that the many stories written about the patient probably identified him to some degree. “I can’t help wondering what was in the many previous stories about him,” he told the BBC reporter.

If previous stories, done without his consent, had identified the patient and his employer, “the ethics analysis might be different,” said Mathewson.

*************************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

AI Born with Warnings

Case Study, , , , , ,

http://www.researchgate.net image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

Like nuclear power, artificial intelligence is described as a threat to humanity.

A difference is that the atomic bomb was intentionally invented as a weapon of mass destruction.

For some, artificial intelligence (AI) seems more like a technology that stealthily places a suffocating pillow over the face of sleeping humanity, causing extinction. AI development could lead to machines that think for themselves, and there lies the problem.

Warnings sounded

Warnings are sounded repeatedly, most recently by the Bletchley Declaration on Artificial Intelligence Safety on Nov. 1-2, 2023, a new global effort to unlock the benefits of the new technology by ensuring it remains safe.

At the two-day summit in England, 28 governments, including the United States, the United Kingdom, the European Union and China, signed the declaration acknowledging the potentially catastrophic risks posed by artificial intelligence.

The warning seems well-timed, since 2024 is expected to be a transformative year for AI. It is the year, predicts The Economist magazine, that “generative AI will go mainstream.”

Year of experimentation

Large companies spent much of 2023 experimenting with the new technology, while venture-capital investors poured some $36 billion into the new invention. That laid the foundation for what is expected next.

“In 2024 expect companies outside the technology sector to start adopting generative AI with the aim of cutting costs and boosting productivity,” The Economist, a Britain-based publication, predicted.

For some, this is unsettling.

Business leaders, technologists and AI experts are divided on whether the technology will serve as a “renaissance” for humanity or the source of its downfall, according to Fortune Magazine.

At a summit for chief executive officers in June, 42 percent of them said they believe AI “has the potential to destroy humanity within the next five to 10 years.” Fortune added that one AI “godfather” considered such an existential threat “preposterously ridiculous.”

Science fiction

The Washington Post reported similar findings: “Prominent tech leaders are warning that artificial intelligence would take over. Other researchers and executives say that’s science fiction.”

Why should we fear AI?

Among the scenarios postulated is that self-governing AI robots designed to tend to human needs might decide that extermination is the most logical solution to ending human tendencies to wage war. An autonomous machine might think humans are routinely killing themselves in vast numbers anyway. To end such suffering, the machine might decide to copy human behavior. Destroy them for their own good.

Putting a humorous spin on it, a cartoon shows a robot telling a man: “The good news is I have discovered inefficiencies. The bad news is that you’re one of them.”

A conundrum

At the root of this conundrum is trying to think like AI robots of the future.

At the British AI safety summit at Bletchley Park, tech billionaire and Tesla CEO Elon Musk took a stab at describing the AI future.

“We should be quite concerned” about Terminator-style humanoid robots that “can follow you anywhere. If a robot can follow you anywhere, what if they get a software update one day, and they’re not so friendly anymore?”

Musk added: “There will come a point where no job is needed – you can have a job if you want for personal satisfaction.” He believes one of the challenges of the future will be how to find meaning in life in a world where jobs are unnecessary. In that way, AI will be “the most disruptive force in history.”

Musk made the remarks while being interviewed by British prime minister Rishi Sunak, who said that AI technology could pose a risk “on a scale like pandemics and nuclear war.” That is why, said Sunak, global leaders have “a responsibility to act to take the steps to protect people.”

Full public disclosure

Nuclear power was unleashed upon the world largely in wartime secrecy.  Artificial intelligence is different in that it appears to be getting full disclosure through international public meetings while still in its infancy. The concept is so new, Associated Press added “generative artificial intelligence” and 10 key AI terms to its stylebook on Aug. 17, 2023.

The role of journalists has never been more important. They have the responsibility to “boldly tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience,” according to the Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics. And that includes keeping an eye on emerging technology.

The challenge of informing the public of mind-boggling AI technology, which could decide the future welfare of human populations, comes at a tumultuous time in world history.

Journalists already are covering two world wars – one between Ukraine and Russia, and the other between Israel and Hamas. The coming U.S. presidential election finds the country politically fragmented and violently divided.

Weakened mass media

These challenges to keep the public more informed about what affects their lives comes at a time when U.S. mass media are weakened by downsizing and staff cuts. The Medill School of Journalism reports that since 2005, the country has lost more than one-fourth of its newspapers and is on track to lose a third by 2025.

Now artificial intelligence must be added to issues demanding journalism’s attention. This is no relatively simple story, like covering fires or the police beat. Artificial intelligence is a story that will require reportorial skill involving business, economics, the environment, health care and government regulations. And it must be done ethically.

It is a challenge already recognized by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), which joined with 16 journalism organizations from around the world to forge a landmark ethical framework for covering the transformative technology.

Paris Charter

The Paris Charter on AI in Journalism was finalized in November during the Paris Peace Forum, which provides guidelines for responsible journalism practices.

“The fast evolution of artificial intelligence presents new challenges and opportunities,” said Gerard Ryle, ICIJ executive director. “It has unlocked innovative avenues for analyzing data and conducting investigations. But we know that unethical use of these technologies can compromise the very integrity of news.”

The 10-point charter states: “The social role of journalism and media outlets – serving as trustworthy intermediaries for society and individuals – is a cornerstone of democracy and enhances the right to information for all.” Artificial intelligence can assist media in fulfilling their roles, says the charter, “but only if they are used transparently, fairly and responsibly in an editorial environment that staunchly upholds journalistic ethics.”

Among the 10 principles, media outlets are told “they are liable and accountable for every piece of content they publish.” Human decision-making must remain central to long-term strategies and daily editorial choices. Media outlets also must guarantee the authenticity of published content.

“As essential guardians of the right to information, journalists, media outlets and journalism support groups should play an active role in the governance of AI systems,” the Paris Charter states.

***********************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Ethics of Buying Cookies

Accountability, Case Study, Conflict of interest, , ,

http://www.pinterest.pt image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

‘Tis the season for – among other things – generosity.

Appeals come from charities, emergency services, environment and animal welfare groups – like The Salvation Army, the Sierra Club, the Anti-Cruelty Society or Meals on Wheels, just to name a few among hundreds.

But should journalists contribute to them, especially if they write about such organizations? The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics warns journalists to “avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.”

A photojournalist contacted AdviceLine, saying “when I started as a freelance photojournalist for a major metro daily 30 years ago, it was drilled into my head by an editor that we can’t support any causes.” She quoted the editor, who said: “If a Girl Scout comes to your door with a fundraiser, you can’t give them any money.”

“I stayed true to this for 30 years,” said the photojournalist. “I don’t sign any petitions, I don’t opinionate on Facebook, I don’t give any money to any organizations or fundraisers.”

But she’s having some doubts after refusing to give one of her photos to a city animal shelter for a public information campaign warning people against locking pets in hot cars. “I’m not sure I did the right thing,” she said, especially since animal welfare advocates were “totally put off” by her refusal.

Can generosity be unethical? David Ozar, the AdviceLine ethics expert who took the query, admits he pondered the question for several days before contacting the photojournalist. Even ethics experts agonize over ethics.

“I can easily imagine an editor, especially 30 years ago, simplifying the ethics of conflicts of interest in the way he or she did back then,” said Ozar, acknowledging what the SPJ ethics code says. “But I have been teaching that this way of stating how to respond ethically when interests conflict is mistaken because it oversimplifies things far too much.

“The problem is that everyone has conflicting interests all the time and simply saying ‘avoid them’ is not helpful. Anyone who works for pay or even pro bono but gets credit for it somehow (or just satisfaction) has an interest in the pay/credit/satisfaction as well as in doing the work according to relevant standards. We could not function if that were not true. So the idea of ‘simply avoiding’ is not helpful.

“The real ethical question is to ask whether the ‘other interests’ are likely to outweigh (or are already doing so) the interests of the people we as professionals are supposed to be serving, which in journalism is our audience (readers, viewers, etc.). Is the ‘other interest’ likely to cause us to not serve them as well as we ought? For example, the reporter holds back facts that are really important to the readers/viewers because they will reflect badly on the reporter’s brother-in-law or, worse yet, is the ‘other interest’ those whom we as professionals serve” and might be harmed?

Ozar also suggests transparency allows journalists to support good causes by telling readers and viewers of a decision to support a cause, warning them “to be cautious about our professional judgments in such situations.”

“Buying Girl Scout cookies is, in my view, a very simple case in which, at most, transparency would be fully adequate ethically,” but relevant “only if you were reporting on the Girl Scouts.”

Ozar agrees journalists must avoid the appearance of impropriety, since “journalism is in the integrity business and things that might make reporters or their organizations or the journalism profession look biased, unfair, half-hearted about the truth, etc., are certainly things that need careful examination.”

Ozar does not stop there. Other questions for consideration are: What are readers/viewers likely to think about the matter? How likely are they to think negatively? And which readers/viewers are likely to think that way?

The public needs to know if journalists are acting without integrity, which is more important than the simple act of buying Girl Scout cookies.

*******************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Halloween Display Shock

Case Study

ClarksvilleNOW image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

A Halloween display depicting a lynching of three figures hanging from a tree near Clarksville, Tenn., posed one of the most disturbing and sensitive ethics cases handled by the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists.

The origins of Halloween dates back 2,000 years to a Celtic festival marking the end of summer and the start of winter, when it was believed ghosts of the dead returned to earth and caused trouble.

The racist Halloween display in Clarksville was causing serious trouble for Rob Selkow, site manager and news director for ClarksvilleNOW, a digital newspaper/news website affiliated with six radio stations serving middle Tennessee and southern Kentucky.

A passerby took a cell phone photo of the hanging scene in a residential area of the Fort Campbell U.S. Army base and sent it to the newspaper.

A startling scene

It showed three blood-spattered figures with black heads hanging from a tree, their hands tied behind their backs – a male, a female and a child.

“What happened,” recalls Selkow, “I got the photo on a smart phone. It looked like a scene out of (the movie) ‘Mississippi Burning,’ with “black figures being hanged.”

Selkow’s first thought was, “we needed confirmation,” and he called the Army base public affairs office.

Public Information Officer Brendalyn Carpenter said her office was notified of a Halloween display that was “offensive in nature” and authorities were sent to investigate. The homeowner on the Army base was informed of community concerns and he removed the display, with apologies.

Army values

“Displays of an offensive nature are not reflective of Army values and the family-friendly environment provided for employees and residents of the Fort Campbell community,” Carpenter said.

With that confirmation, ClarksvilleNOW published the photo, which went viral. It was seen nationwide.

It was “the most powerful image we ever published,” said Selkow, and the biggest story for paid use. “That was the first one we got that had legs.”

But that is not the end of the story.

A soldier calls

The resident who put up the Halloween display, a soldier, called Selkow, insisting on the removal of the controversial photo from the ClarksvilleNOW website.

“You need to take that down; there was nothing racial to that,” the soldier demanded.

“I said, we’d be happy to discuss it,” answered Selkow, but the soldier would discuss it no further. “He just wanted us to take it down. The Army post was not happy with it. It does not make them look good.”

The setting

This is a good time to step back and consider the setting in which the furor over the Halloween effigies happened. Stories do not happen in a vacuum. History sometimes plays an unseen role in today’s events. The Clarksville area has a turbulent and tragic history.

The Fort Campbell Army base covers 102,414 acres straddling the Kentucky-Tennessee border between Hopkinsville, Kentucky and Clarksville, Tennessee. It is home to the 101st Airborne Division and roughly 2,500 officers and 45,000 enlisted personnel. 

Started in 1942, Fort Campbell is about 10 miles from downtown Clarksville. Troops from Fort Campbell have deployed in every military campaign since the post was created.

Named for war hero

Clarksville was founded in 1785 and named for Gen. George Rogers Clark, frontier fighter and Revolutionary War hero, and brother of William Clark of the Lewis and Clark Expedition.

By the start of the Civil War, planters in the area depended on enslaved African American workers to grow tobacco, one of the major commodity crops. In 1861, Clarksville and Montgomery county voted unanimously for Tennessee to secede and join the Confederate States of America.

Fighting for the Confederacy, Clarksville lost a large part of its male population and many Clarksville men became Union prisoners of war.

Confederate army camps

The state was home to three Confederate States army camps.

Neighboring Hopkinsville also supported the Confederacy, and in Civil War battles was occupied at least half a dozen times by Confederate and Union forces.

Tennessee once was heavily inhabited by native Americans. But native populations were forcibly moved to the south and west. From 1838 to 1839, nearly 17,000 Cherokees were forced to march from “emigration depots” in Eastern Tennessee to Indian Territory west of Arkansas. This became known as “The Trail of Tears.” An estimated 4,000 Cherokees died during the eviction march.

Tobacco growers

By the 1900s, Tennessee tobacco growers were fighting among themselves in what became known as the “Black Patch Tobacco Wars.” A planters’ protective association of Kentucky and Tennessee imposed a boycott on tobacco sales to drive prices up. An organization known as the “Night Riders” punished farmers who tried to skirt the boycott and sell their tobacco secretly, burning down barns and destroying tobacco fields to terrorize farmers and tobacco brokers into submission.

The official motto of Tennessee is “Agriculture and Commerce.” Its unofficial nickname is “The Volunteer State,” stemming from the War of 1812 when many Tennessee men answered the governor’s call to enlist.

Rigors of the tobacco trade, Civil War battles, southern sympathies and training for wars all mark this part of America.

Take it down

But history was not foremost in Selkow’s mind. The soldier’s pleas to take down that embarrassing photo nagged at the news director. He wondered what the fairest and most ethical thing to do would be?

So he called AdviceLine and spoke to Hugh Miller, an experienced AdviceLine advisor.

After viewing the photo, Miller read the story that appeared with it. Miller “went line-by-line with me and checked it for fairness,” said Selkow. The story carried two bylines, his and fellow reporter Nicole June.

AdviceLine report

Adviceline keeps reports on every call or inquiry it gets for ethics advice. Here is what Miller wrote in his report:

“We discussed the issue of editing a story already published. In general, this is a bad idea, I argued. Permitting it opens all kinds of doors to amending a public record, which makes those records not facts but completely fungible containers. The time to decide what goes in a story is before one publishes it. If it needs emendation later, publish a correction.”

The photo had been cropped to focus on the display and exclude details showing the location of the house as much as possible. Miller argued against “ex-post-facto manipulation of an image,” which “should not be done without informing the reader.”

Photo cropped

On that point, Selkow responded: “We cropped the photo to make it so someone would not know whose home it was. I know you are not supposed to crop things, but I would do it again.”

Back to Miller’s report: “Next, we discussed harm to the family. The Society of Professional Journalists code of ethics asks us to ‘recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone’s privacy.’

“But clearly, this display was meant to draw attention. And the arguably racist appearance of such a display, and on the grounds of a military base, was clearly a matter for public attention. Given this, was the story causing the family undue or uncalled-for harm? The language of the article was neutral and fairly objective, hardly incitatory. The reporters agreed. We decided that, if they wanted to deal with the issue of the family’s harassment, the family should be approached for a follow-up story, and the base public affairs office asked for comment.”

Photo stays

Selkow did not take down the photo.

“It was over and done. Nothing was done after the (soldier’s) call. We knew we were not going to take it down. It was going to stay put.”

After talking with Miller, said Selkow, “I was able to stand firm on the story and know I was acting ethically and responsibly in regard to the person whose home was in the photo and gave them every chance to respond and talk to us.”

Since the soldier would not discuss his motives for putting up the display, said Selkow, “my hands were tied.” Though he admitted to “a queasy feeling when it strikes you how your work is affecting people’s lives. In that instance, it affirmed the journalistic decision that we made and instructive in a number of ways to deal with sensitive stories.”

Advice helpful

Contacting AdviceLine “was very helpful to me that day,” Selkow added, and pointed out that he cites the tricky Halloween display event when speaking to journalism students. “I bring it up as a case study.”

ClarksvilleNOW is owned by Saga Communications, Inc., a broadcast company with properties in 27 mid-size markets.

The Halloween display story touched off a vigorous debate in the online comment section, including remarks about racism and slavery. The Clarksvillenow.com website covers a population of about 200,000.

AdviceLine first reported on the Clarksville story in 2016. Since then, it has become an example in an issue of growing interest: Removing archived online stories, either because they are embarrassing or circumstances changed over time. That could include a long-ago arrest or a divorce that changes somebody’s marital status. People sometimes want history erased.

As Miller pointed out, journalists are historians who leave accurate records of local and global events. Just because it is technically possible to delete parts of this online history does not mean journalists should.

*******************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Fracking News Rejected

Case Study

revistaenfoque.com.co image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

Fracking, the controversial process of forcing oil and natural gas from the Earth, was added to the tumultuous history of Southern Illinois, a land known as “Little Egypt.”

Journalists joined a long list of combatants going back more than a century when a publisher hung a sign in his newspaper’s window saying: “No anti-fracking info welcome. If you have a problem, see my lawyer.”

Fracking was coming fast to the rural county where the newspaper is located as a gas company bought up mineral rights in the area. The publisher was feeling pressure from businesses that stand to benefit financially from the gas production business.

Both sides debated

The publisher decided that his paper, and a sister paper, would not accept articles or material from groups that oppose fracking for environmental reasons. Prior to that decision, both newspapers published articles for several weeks on both sides of the debate about fracking.

Then came the sign in the window. It was too much for a freelance writer working for one of the newspapers, who contacted AdviceLine and took action of her own.

“I resigned from writing my regular human interest column in protest because I think this is a violation of journalism ethics; but I wanted to get the judgment of some other people who know about this,” the journalist told David Ozar, the AdviceLine advisor.

Stands by standards

No doubt, the freelance writer stands with the Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics, which urged journalists to seek truth and report it, and to recognize a special obligation to serve as watchdogs over public affairs without favoring special interest groups.

The final article the freelancer wrote for her newspaper explained why she was resigning, and the publisher agreed to publish it. The freelancer also allowed AdviceLine to report details of the case for educational purposes.

This episode emerged in an area known for bloody feuds, gun battles with rivals and authorities, and a distinct southern flavor inherited from its earliest settlers who came from America’s hilly backcountry in the southeast. Although Illinois was an anti-slavery state, some Southern Illinoisians owned slaves and fought for the confederacy in the Civil War. They are culturally aligned with Western Kentucky, Southwestern Indiana and West Tennessee – where people all speak with similar Southern accents.

Towns boast of “old fashioned southern hospitality,” inviting visitors to “come experience our scenic beauty and enjoy the peace and tranquility of our small town.”

Little Egypt

The region got its name, “Little Egypt,” when early settlers compared the bountiful Mississippi River with the Nile and ancient Indian mounds in the area, like the Cahokia Mounds, to the Egyptian pyramids. The earliest inhabitants of Illinois arrived around 12,000 BC.

Once the wealthiest part of the state, and earliest to be settled, Illinois fell on hard times in a series of steps that transformed the region.

Vast tracts of forests covered southern Illinois, before they were clearcut to make way for farms. Forty-two percent of Illinois once was covered with forest. Today, about 10 percent is left.

The trees were seen as obstacles to be swept away. A 1818 booklet said: “To travel day after day, among trees of a hundred feet high, without a glimpse of the surrounding country, is oppressive to a degree…”

Forty acres of land sold for $5, fueling a land rush. In the early 1800s, 99 percent of the men in southern Illinois were farmers. Farming grew swiftly in the region and peaked arounder 1900, when dramatic crop failures led to severe economic hardship for farm families. 

Century of farming

“The general region has been farmed for 100 years and much of the farm soil is worn out,” said a U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service report. “Many of the farms have been abandoned on account of worn out soil and erosion. A large percentage of the row crops are on soil which should not have been cleared of timber. It was suitable only for tree crops. Practically the whole region has been logged from one to ten times.” That also led to catastrophic floods.

Log houses from that time still are scattered along backcountry roads, although stone chimneys often are all that remain.

Coal mining next took its toll on the land in the region.

Goaded by conservationists, state and federal government officials moved to reclaim what became known as “the wastelands of Illinois.”

In 1931, the Illinois General Assembly passed an act inviting the federal government to establish a national forest in the state, in addition to one created in 1925.

A planted forest

This led to the 280,000-acre Shawnee National Forest in 1939, much of it exhausted farmland. It includes the Ozark and Shawnee Hills of southern Illinois and covers parts of nine Illinois counties. Illinois cities in or near the area are Carbondale, Marion and Cairo.

Throughout the 1930s and 1940s, the Civilian Conservation Corps planted pine trees to prevent erosion and help rebuild the soil, although the region includes hardwood trees and other plants and animals typical of the area. 

Through the 1980s and 1990s, the region was swept by more conflict as local, regional and national environment groups campaigned for the preservation and expansion of Shawnee National Forest and a wise use management plan.

The newspaper publisher who wanted no more information about fracking seemed to be carrying on a long tradition in southern Illinois of combative disagreement.

*********************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Missing Person Reports

Case Study

lauthinvestigations.com image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

One of the most common stories a reporter encounters is the missing person report.

Though it appears simple, such reports are fraught with peril. Relatives are distraught, urging reporters and police to act fast so the public can help search for a loved one. Journalists sometimes are accused of dragging their feet with the passage of time, or accused of bias for reporting some missing cases and not others.

These cases can become highly emotional, and seen as a matter of survival for the missing person.

Missing person defined

A missing person is defined as a person who has disappeared and whose status as alive or dead cannot be confirmed.

More than 600,000 people go missing in the U.S. every year, according to the National Missing and Unidentified Persons database. That’s about 1,600 every day. Another 4,400 unidentified bodies are recovered every year. Just trying to decide which of these cases to cover is part of a reporter’s dilemma. There are so many of them.

The United States has what may be the world’s highest number of missing persons. By far the most common reason a person is reported missing is kidnapping, particularly of children under the age of six. The vast majority of missing persons cases are resolved.

Managing editor calls

AdviceLine got involved in such a case when the managing editor of a New York State daily newspaper called for ethics guidance.

A 23-year-old woman was last seen in a hotel, but family members lost contact with her over the weekend and considered her missing. Her father posted information about her disappearance on his Facebook page. A reporter interviewed him.

“He told us that she had been on anxiety medications,” said the managing editor, “and had exhibited bizarre behavior during a Skype phone call.” The father also said he spoke with his daughter’s best friend, who said the missing woman was off her medications.

Some reservations

“We had some reservations about publishing all this information about her, but we went ahead and published it anyway,” said the managing editor. The missing woman was found a few hours after the print edition hit the street.

This is usually the reason editors hesitate to go to print too soon with missing person reports. As luck would have it, the missing person turns up shortly after her name appears in print. Complications ensue.

“Subsequently,” said the managing editor, “we received a phone call from the young woman’s best friend, in which she claimed she had communicated with her friend’s father in confidence, and would not have spoken so freely had she known that her statements would find their way into print.” 

Second thoughts

She said her friend, the formerly missing young woman, would be greatly upset to see such private information about herself made public, and that it might do her some harm. The caller asked the managing editor to redact the online story to remove references to the missing woman’s medical condition and what the friend had told the woman’s father.

The managing editor asked AdviceLine: “Do we let the record stand? Or do we redact the online story in some way?”

In his written report on the case, Hugh Miller, the AdviceLine advisor, wrote: “We spoke at some length about the conflict between refusal to alter an already-published story and the ‘minimize harm’ issues raised by the case. The most troubling bit had to do with the communication of the woman’s best friend to her father being made public. But the whole question of her privacy, particularly regarding sensitive personal medical information, was an important one.

Private individual

“She is a private individual, with a greater presumptive right to privacy and consideration of that privacy from journalists. Future employers doing an internet search for her name, for example, might come up with the story in its unedited form, and it might raise unnecessary red flags for her.

“The issue is: Does she have a particularly strong case for special consideration here? Would the public be harmed if the information about her medical condition were to be deleted? Did it really need to know that information at the time the story was first issued? We did not come to a decisive conclusion.”

The managing editor was left to make up his mind. “But our conversation served to highlight the ‘minimize harm’ issues in the case,” wrote Miller.

What would you do, if you were the managing editor? What is the least damaging way to handle this case, the least damaging to the formerly missing woman and the least damaging to the newspaper’s reputation?

*************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.

Church Leader Accused

Case Study

pamirtimes.net image

By Casey Bukro

Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists

Stories involving children who allegedly are sexually molested by church leaders are among the most sensitive and emotionally charged that confront journalists.

That was the kind of story a California reporter was covering, and he called AdviceLine for some guidance. He was covering the trial of a church youth leader accused of having a sexual relationship with a boy.

The boy is now 18, but was younger at the time of the alleged relationship. He is identified as John Doe in court, but his mother, the first witness in the case, is using her full name. The reporter wants to know whether to print her name, thereby indirectly naming the boy. They live in a small town. The reporter is concerned about the potential harm to the boy from being identified.

“I brought up the Society of Professional Journalists ethics code, in particular pointing to the relevance of seeking truth versus minimizing harm,” said David Craig, the AdviceLine ethics expert who handled the call from the reporter. “I asked if the news organization has any policies or precedents that are relevant?” The reporter said there were none.

“I also asked about whether any other news organizations were reporting on this (not that this should decide it, but it might be relevant.) He didn’t know of any other outlets, at least mainstream ones. I also asked him whether not using the name would create any difficult precedents if other people in sensitive legal situations want their name left out of stories – trying to think of a counter-argument in favor of using the name.”

Craig consulted with another member of the AdviceLine team to get a second opinion on this since the boy is now at the legal age of an adult and his mother is allowing herself to be named. The second team member agreed with Craig’s inclination to err on the side of caution since there seemed to be no compelling reason to identify the youth. Even though he is 18, he is still young and warrants some additional protection.

“That’s in keeping with what the SPJ code and ethics scholars would say about being sensitive to vulnerable parties, including young people,” said Craig. When he called the reporter, Craig learned that the reporter consulted further with his editor and they had come to the same conclusion.

*********************************************************************

The Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists was founded in 2001 by the Chicago Headline Club (Chicago professional chapter of the Society of Professional Journalists) and Loyola University Chicago Center for Ethics and Social Justice. It partnered with the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University in 2013. It is a free service.

Professional journalists are invited to contact the Ethics AdviceLine for Journalists for guidance on ethics. Call 866-DILEMMA or ethicsadvicelineforjournalists.org.