Ethical And Legal Responsibilities In The Mass Media
Razan Abou Chakra & Raneem Al Qadi
Introduction
The concept of making a decision might sound like an easy task; as all you need to do is; base it on an old principle your brain has been fed with since birth. However, a study about “The Evolutionary Roots of Human Decision Making”, has proven that “human decisions tend to systematically deviate from what rational choice models would predict.” (Santos & Rosati, 2015) Such studies might suggest that many make decisions irrationally based on their interpretations of certain events occurring around them. Unintentionally, many might allow their biased opinions to interfere, when making a decision that would as well affect others around them.
With many numbers of cases, it is important to understand that a number of academic organizations have worked hard to provide theories that prove the ability of a person to make an ethical decision; that would not affect any party negatively. As an illustration, the “UC San Diego” collaborated with “Josephson Institute” to set a basic process for making an ethical decision which requires; “Commitment” to do the right thing always, “Consciousness” to base their behaviors based on “Moral convictions”, and “Competency” to evaluate what is happening around us, look for “alternatives”, and understand the effect of the upcoming consequences. ("Making Ethical Decisions: Process", 2016)
Markedly, with all those demonstrated theories and studies, we can not oversee the work that has been prominent, since 1909, in the journalistic field. The “Society of Professional Journalists” has declared a set of four fundamental principles that should encourage journalists to make an ethical decision when publishing a story regardless of what benefits would it bring. So in the hope that journalism would always shed light on any wrongdoing, as well as, support the voices that are not heard, any decision made should correspond to “Seeking truth and Reporting it”, “Minimize harm”, “Act Independently”, and the last but not least “Be accountable and Transparent”. ("SPJ Code of Ethics", 2014)
However, despite all the vows that a journalist makes on a personal or career level, we still face many who choose their personal benefits over their communities without considering the consequences. With this in mind, we will be examining an ethical dilemma that happened recently when some oversee journalists violated the SPJ’s fundamental principles to get a story out of the Yazidi Women traumatizing stories.
Explanation of the Yazidi Women Case
With all the damage ISIS has caused, stories came out, including stories on abducted Yazidi women and children who got continuously abused and raped by ISIS members. Children as young as seven-year-olds and hundreds of women were raped, assaulted, manipulated, and abused. The job of a reporter/journalist is to give a voice for the silenced and spread awareness to the non-aware, but where such traumatizing events, there should be different approaches to it. A good story, but at what cost? Where do we draw the line between ethical and unethical practices?
A report on Yazidi women’s perceptions of the media coverage on their stories supported by Women’s Studies International Forum proves that these women were interviewed by foreign reporters, mostly men and had a “macho” approach to their stories which in other words mean questions and interviews were directed in a very inconsiderate way to the victim’s emotional state; the main priority was getting insensitivity asked questions answered. (Harb, 2018)
Additionally, these women were forced to speak because of their camp leaders or whoever is responsible of the area, once reporters gained access to the camp, it was all about exclusivity and getting good stories by disregarding the survivor’s emotions, mental, and physical state considering most of them do not have the resources or means to get the help needed. (Harb, 2018)
Giving voice to the voiceless does not mean leaving the ethical rules of journalism. These women had no idea where their stories are going to be published or when which shows that no consent to publish was taken from those women. Moreover, those journalists promised to “save” Yazidi women as well as find quick solutions for their situation and in some cases, they were constantly reassured that they will be receiving the help they need if they agreed to be interviewed. (Harb, 2018) Women this vulnerable are obviously being taken advantage of with fake promises to get a story out of them. All of this shows us how some reporters treat victims as exclusive stories with no emotion.
Ethical concerns and Consequences
When it comes to reporting sexual violence, there are different steps that should be taken in preparation to it, such as studying the outcomes of it and how to approach a victim, what type of language to use, and most of all making them feel comfortable (“Reporting on Sexual Violence”, 2011).
Unfortunately, reporters haven't taken into consideration any of these guidelines according to the feedback these women gave, they went in for a story and came out to put up an exclusive story disregarding any ethicality approaching it. This case shows the worst example on how journalists could act sometimes to get better rewards and breaks all codes of ethics, they were not truthful to their interviewees, they manipulated the victims in order to get the story they want (Harb, 2018). Journalists here are trying to financially benefit from this situation and that's their main priority when they get the story they want and at the same time, it is under the expense of these victims safety when all their images are published through media outlets as well as getting these journalists attention will most likely turn more eyes on them at the camps they live in.
Ethical Decision and Analysis:
The act of generating and sustaining trust between a media outlet and its society has always been a prominent goal to succeed in such a competitive field. However, the extent of competition, in the twenty-first century led many journalists and editors to turn a blind eye to the seriousness of the upcoming risks and consequences from decisions they make in the newsroom. Not to mention, that the state of the financial loss removed media outlets from the track of abiding by the principles of the Society of Professional Journalism and what a citizen should bear responsibilities of social respect among peers of the same community. With this, we can add many other external and internal factors such as; exclusivity, personal success, and spreading a false image of the middle eastern’s practices.
As mentioned previously, all those factors played a role in changing the way journalists raced to get a story, for this reason, many began questioning those practices, since 2014, such as a human rights lawyer in Kurdistan, Sherizaan Minwalla, who felt that “something is wrong here”. (Hylton, 2018) She noticed how the journalist interviewing the survivors, paid little attention to the ethicality of what’s being published. Adding to this, we can not deny that the digital divide caused the misconception between the sources - survivors from ISIS captivity - and the journalists. Many survivors said that the consent given to journalists was because they were promised protection and a change, but many interviews released online worldwide caused harm to the survivor’s family members who were still under the captivity of ISIS. To prove the impact of that unethical media coverage, we will be looking at a set of approaches that reveals where did the journalists covering the victims emerge away from the ethical path of getting a compelling story.
To start with, if we examine such media coverages based on Bok’s model by the philosopher, Sissela Bok, we find that the two premises are not met at all. The first premise that makes a decision ethical is that journalists “must have empathy for the people” they are covering their stories. (Patterson, Wilkins, & Painter, 2019) However, the behavior of some journalists in 2014, has shown that their empathy stepped back for exclusivity in the market, much more than a survivor’s emotional feelings. As a result, Yazidi women said that while they were “suffering physical and emotional pain after sharing their stories with journalists”, (Hylton, 2018) the journalists were only thinking of getting more and more insights into what happens when you are captivated by ISIS. The most compelling evidence of this is when a woman was interviewed the next morning in the camp after she had escaped ISIS. (Hylton, 2018) Moving forward, the second premise states that journalists should “maintain social trust”, and when examined it has been found that not only the interviewed Yazidi women were the ones to feel that those acts eliminated the social trust, but also, a number of specialists and activists in the Women’s Studies International Forum, like Johanna Foster, felt disturbed after reading the headlines describing those women as “Sex Slaves”, even before reading the fully-exposed identity interviews. (Carrie, 2018) So if the journalists applied the Bok’s model that asks the person to consult his/her own conscience, the journalist would have sensed the extent of rightness in the decision they made. Second, if those journalists sought an expert’s advice for an acceptable way to publish those stories without putting those victims and their families under danger, they would have found a balanced ground between the two extremes of not publishing or shedding light on the identities of those victims. Third, if those overseeing journalists conducted a discussion with anyone or even a hypothetical one, they might have got to the conclusion that emphasizes the dangerous consequences behind those actions, and thus they would not have published stories and violated the human rights of the Yazidi Woman. (Patterson, Wilkins, & Painter, 2019)
Another key approach to examining the unethical situation is the use of the Potter Box. An ethical decision-making model that requires someone to understand all the facts of the situation, to outline the values - the journalist’s values or the ethical news values -, to apply the “philosophical principles”, and to articulate a person’s loyalty. Applying this model, we will directly start with the second part which states the values as we explained the situation and its facts thoroughly previously.
One of the prominent points that affect any ethical decision making is the Ethical News Values that the journalist should acquire. However, those values are not always considered by many when publishing a story. As they would step back to achieve the exclusivity and speed that is cherished by media outlets in the century where supply exceeds the demand. Regarding the Yazidi Women’s situation, the journalists had to value dignity, which respects each person - as a source - without letting the story affect our opinions. For instance, naming Yazidi Women who are victims, “Sex Slaves” is considered a way that degraded them from all humanity after all that they went through. As a result, many had been affected due to those coverages, as they were not able to complete living normally among people after all that has been said about them, especially this is an important matter in the middle east. Of course, with this if the journalist had valued reciprocity, he or she would never have accepted publishing a story about someone they cared about, in the same way, they violated the journalistic values that ask for minimizing harm and maintaining social respect. With a value leading to another value, equity should be considered also an important issue that leads to valuing the community where the “media outlets and the corporations that own them need to consider themselves as citizens rather than mere “profit centers”. (Patterson, Wilkins, & Painter, 2019) In this case, the value of equity has been violated as the journalists used wrong acts to seek justice for those women. They violated their privacy and led them to a severe state of mind after obliging them to recall what happened when they were captivated by ISIS. All this proves that sources were not treated equally. Furthermore, many women said that they had little idea regarding the platform where the interview will be published. They were not aware that those contents will be shared globally and thus might affect their family members. All this would have been prevented if the journalist abided by their ethical values. Of course, one major value that might have affected the published content was accuracy, as some journalists promised protection or money to the interviewee, prominently, this affected the answers of those women who thought that giving journalists what they want - events that get publicity- will allow them to get better benefits. (Patterson, Wilkins, & Painter, 2019)
This issue was a troubling act mentioned in an article that states “journalists relied on quid-pro-quo promises of money or aid, which led to a feeling of betrayal by the women, who expected help in return.” (Hylton, 2018)
Moving toward the third part, examining principles could be a leading point to make any ethical decision such as the use of virtue, deontological, and consequential ethics issued by the most known philosophers.
Aristotle’s Golden Mean is the virtue ethics that concentrates on the “ultimate human good” that believes that “virtues lie between extremes”. Thus, basing an ethical decision regarding our situation, on this principle. We conclude that if those journalists wanted to make a right ethical decision, they had to make a decision that lies between the two extremes which are publishing the story the way they did and the other extreme of not publishing the story nor shedding light on the dangerousness of ISIS and their captivity. If they had done this, they would have found a way to publish those stories for the purpose of raising awareness but without negatively affecting the lives of those women, who went through a lot of pain living those incidences so recalling them would be harder. So, the journalists are the “agents” who should make the right choice to achieve the “flourishing” state that pleases the sources, journalists, and the community.
Kant’s Categorical Imperative is the virtue that focuses on the fact that a person's individual decision should turn out to be sufficient to become a universal law. With this in mind, the deontological ethics look at decisions not as “subject to situational factors” but as an applicable decision that puts the act as its predominant element. Adding to this, the principle seeks decision-makers to treat people as ends and not as means, this premise was explicitly violated by those journalists who cover stories for media outlets such as CBS, Fox, and Sky. (Wille, 2018)
As explained earlier, our case shows how those journalists used Yazidi women as means of increasing the media outlet’s profit and the journalist career’s accomplishments. So if treated differently, those women would have not been dehumanized for good news headlines. According to Kant, the action is the prominent source of check for any ethical decision, any person has to take.
Moving forward to the consequential ethics, Mill’s utility principle, that concentrates on the rightness of the act by examining and determining the effects of the consequences and “desirable ends”. The outcome could only be examined through the aftermath of the emotional pressure on the Yazidi women. The effects were determined by many organizations who support women worldwide. They found out that “85 percent of Yazidi women interviewed describe unethical journalism practices” this study proved that they left a huge negative impact on the women who we should combine our powers to help and support them forget what they went through so that they rise and complete their lives. (Hylton, 2018)
Considering the last part of Potter’s box that asks the person to look at his/ her extent of loyalty to certain things or people around them, in the Yazidi women case, we found out that the journalists were loyal to publishing a news report for the sake of exclusivity, popularity, and profit. As we did not sense any act that shows a journalist’s loyalty to minimizing harm and reporting accurately without misleading the sources. Moreover, it has shown that none of the journalistic news values were practiced. All this led women and whoever read those articles feel disturbed and look to journalists as untrustworthy. Their loyalty affected the way they treated the women’s conditions, thus they did not help as much as they harmed the Yazidi women, their families and promoted a false unethical image of the way women are in the Middle East.
Conclusion
The case of Yazidi women is one of many unethical cases throughout history, journalists need to think more, being detached is key but not where it’s a case of a victim of trauma, at the end of the day journalists should give voice to the voiceless and shed light on stories that are being overlooked. However, there is a thin line between doing it ethically and unethically, and in this case, it’s been done unethically, and the motive is a good story; by exploiting them rather than helping these women. Important ethical perspectives and rules should be taken into consideration when putting in a situation like this, such as Aristotle's Golden Mean, Kant’s Categorical Imperative, and Mill’s Utility model. Most importantly the four Journalists Virtues of ethics which should be followed when taking a difficult decision, which are “Seeking truth and Reporting it”, “Minimize harm”, “Act Independently”, and the last but not least “Be accountable and Transparent”. ("SPJ Code of Ethics", 2014)
After this analytical paper, we are sure of the fact that in this case, the Journalistic virtues were obviously not used or taken into consideration, especially minimizing harm. Victims should stop being looked at by some journalists as a good story that would make them money and start being looked at as people who survived severe trauma and the extent of the negative consequences they will endure because of publishing their stories without protecting them.
Work Cited
Carrié, S. (2018, May 4). Yazidi women speak about unethical practices by journalists. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/watchdog/yazidi-isis-interview.php
Harb, Z. (2018, March 8). A case of ethical neglect: How journalists failed Yazidi women. Retrieved from https://www.google.ae/amp/s/www.aljazeera.com/amp/indepth/opinion/case-ethical-neglect-journalists-failed-yazidi-women-180308085956708.html
Hylton, A. (2018, February 26). Study: 85 percent of Yazidi women interviewed describe unethical journalism practices. Retrieved from https://www.womensmediacenter.com/women-under-siege/study-85-percent-of-yazidi-women-interviewed-describe-unethical-journalism-practices
Making Ethical Decisions: Process. (2016, May 4). Retrieved from https://blink.ucsd.edu/finance/accountability/ethics/process.html
Patterson, P., Wilkins, L., & Painter, C. (2019). Media ethics: issues and cases. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Reporting on Sexual Violence. (2011, July 15). Retrieved from https://dartcenter.org/content/reporting-on-sexual-violence
Santos, L. R., & Rosati, A. G. (2015, January 3). The evolutionary roots of human decision making. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4451179/
SPJ Code of Ethics - Society of Professional Journalists. (2014, September 6). Retrieved from https://www.spj.org/ethicscode.asp
Wille, B. (2018, May 4). How journalists may be putting ISIS suspects at risk of abuse. Retrieved from https://www.cjr.org/watchdog/interviewing-isis-suspects.php
Comments