Island Princess
New member
[FONT=tahoma, arial]
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 holRAB 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.
[/FONT]
[FONT=tahoma, arial]WorRAB: 934 [/FONT]
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 holRAB 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.
[/FONT]
[FONT=tahoma, arial]WorRAB: 934 [/FONT]