Sources
In journalism, reliable and credible sources are essential to a successful story. A continually debated topic concerning sources is their power to influence what is published in a news story. Now the question is, should sources be able to review their stories before publication?
Considering the journalistic adherence to reporting accurate information, this would seem like a valuable idea to ensure the story’s accuracy. However, others argue it allows the sources too much control over the portrayal of the story. Throughout my blog post, I will be analyzing this ethical dilemma using the Potter Box, which is an ethical system. This will allow me to carefully work through the situation to arrive at a morally justified decision.
The first step of the Potter Box is to analyze the definition of the situation. This entails the basic question at hand. The definition of this situation is the dilemma journalists have on the ethical position of whether or not to allow sources to review their stories before publication. It is very important that the definition of the situation is clear and accurate. This definition allows an ethical decision to be made that is entirely applicable to the situation it is meant to address.
Next, I will analyze the journalistic values that apply to this situation. The moral values of honesty, truth telling and commitment are what I believe journalists use when considering sources. They value having honest sources that allow for their new stories to not only be credible, but to be authentic as well. The value of truth telling has also continually been a universal value in the world of journalism. It is the cornerstone of the original role of the media, which was to be the “watchdog” for society. Each journalist also values their commitment to their role as a journalist and a commitment to their individual news station as well. These values help decide the ethical principle that will best apply to this situation.
Now I will choose the ethical principle I will apply. I believe that Aristotle’s Mean is the best principle to represent this dilemma, and I believe it will provide a morally justified outcome. Aristotle’s Mean states “moral virtue is a middle state determined by practical wisdom.” Therefore, I will determine a proper “mean” for this situation by locating it between the two extremes of excess and defect. I will neither allow my sources to have complete control over the news stories that I produce nor will I completely reject their input. Considering my values along with Aristotle’s Mean, I will allow my sources to review their news stories only if their intent is to ensure the accuracy of facts and truthful representation, which are the values I stated earlier. However, I will not allow them to alter their news story to simply present themselves or their organization in a better light.
The final step is where I will determine the loyalties, which will strongly influence my final decision. The loyalties of a journalist within this ethical dilemma are their duty to their organization and their duty to society. These both play a crucial role in this decision because these are whom the journalist values most in accordance with their career.
After carefully going through the steps of the Potter Box, I am now able to morally justify my decision concerning sources reviewing their stories before publication.
My middle state is to first determine the intention of the source’s request for review. Then allow or reject the request based the journalistic values of truth telling, honesty and commitment. All of this with a compliance to the basics of Aristotle’s Mean. This conclusion is neither the extreme of defect or excess, but rather a middle state determined by practical wisdom used on a case-by-case basis.
