The Constitutional responsibility of the press is to inform the public. The First
Amendment comes into direct conflict with the rights and responsibilities of media
coverage. There is a fine line between personal privacy and the publics
right to know. The constitution overrides the option of privacy beside the
amendment of freedom of speech or freedom of the press. Freedom of the
press is to be guarded as an inalienable right of the people in a free society.
Freedom of the press carries along with it the right to discuss, question and challenge
the actions of our government and of our public and private institutions. Journalists
hold the right to verbalize unpopular opinions and the privilege to consent with the
majority.
In a hypothetical situation , a man running for president is caught in a bind
where media has to decide if his private life should be published or not.
Involving media forms such as newspapers and television news.
When investigating matters in an individuals private life there is a
question of fairness. The possibility of invasion of privacy is also
present. If this information is printed , How will it make the
person feel? In most situations the person's life being exposed would
feel he is being treated unfairly. However, by not reporting such
information could elude the voters knowledge of the presidential
candidate. A journalist is required to report, it is there
job.
When making implications about any person, the facts must be known
without a doubt. The uselessness of hearsay information or a animus
tip does no good on the creditability of the news. If there is
potential situation developing, it would be a good idea for a journalist
to watch and wait for the events to unfold , then gather the
necessary facts upon gaining the information. It is unconstitutional
to spread lies about an individual. Even if false information is
printed it could take a considerable amount of time for an individual
to regain the publics favor. A journalist is aiming to be
ethical before they print an article . Sometimes it may seem as though a
writer is trying to destroy an individual. In most cases this is not true In
any case an investigation is done to gather the facts relevant to
the situation. Thus arriving at the question of right verses wrong.
In some opinion snooping around and peeking through windows is
reasonable. However this is a major violation of privacy. The
morality of most people would not appreciate the idea of a
journalist lurking about spying on every move they make. In any
form of news media, information must be gathered to create an accurate
picture of the actual events. Therefore it is reasonable to investigate the
person in which information is necessary to obtain. It is unfair
to take the investigation to the point where the law is broken.
What is right and wrong? There are many situations which sit on the line of right
and wrong . The press holds the responsibility to inform the people
of the news whether it is logical or not. The Government
imposes restrictions despite the apparently absolute nature of the
First Amendment to the Constitution, which states "Congress shall make no
law... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press." Keeping this in
mind gives any journalist the right to write, print, or speak about
any thing.
If any person were subject to a similar situation the issues
would be totally different. However, this person is running
for president which makes him subject to the constant pressure
of the news media. The person becomes a target. The
first wrong move he makes will be on the front page of
every newspaper and the top story of the evening news. Even if
a common person was involved, instead of a presidential candidate
the press would have the option to follow up a story on the
matter.
The Society of Professional Journalists must operate under a code
of ethics. This code summed up in a few sentences states
that the journalists are to maintain the duty to serve the truth.
, stated under the Constitutional role to seek the truth is part
of the public's right to know the truth. "We believe those
responsibilities carry obligations that require journalists to perform
with intelligence, objectivity, accuracy , and fairness," the code says.
Journalists are free to any interest other than the public's right
to know. There is a difference between broadcast codes and
newspaper codes. It is a difference between positive and negative
liberties.
Journalists hold the responsibility to make ethical decisions. They
must recognize the principles about fairness , justice, truth, and the
American way. People are allowed to agree and disagree about the
right thing to do in tense situations , this is where the matter of
opinion sets in. It would be something for all of us to come to
the same justifiable conclusions. However, in today's society opinions
range far and wide. I believe that in the high speed technological
age of today journalists work well to provide the public with the
important facts of the news. The information is prompt and precise
highlighting the most important facts. If I was a journalists put in this
hypothetical situation I would push the power of the journalist to the very edge.
That is why the law was written to protect a journalist from the possibility of going
to far. As for the twist of right verses wrong , would sit on the shoulders of
the average opinion.
|