Here are responses from Bashir Audu, an intern project engineer and student, who did not wish to be filmed:
Q: A well known reporter who wants to march in a controversial cause or topic, say a reporter who wants to march for pro choice, do you think it's a conflict of interest? A: Yes, I do because being a reporter, you have to in my opinion...maintain some sort of neutral stance and if you're pro or against, your message will not be well received by people of the opposing view because they know your stance and they know you're not going to give a no-biased judgment
Q: Would you rather the journalists be open or discreet about their views when they report? A: I'd rather they be discreet. Because...if you get a reporter that is tilting to one side of the issue, you never get a good view of what's going on.
Q: What if they're view on something has nothing to do with what they are reporting on? Do you think her belief in something unrelated effects the credibility of her reporting or the newspaper she works for? A: No, no because every reporter is going to have views on issues and so you can't bring all the issues up to what she is currently writing about in her job.
Q: Do you think by her attending controversial events like these would damage credibility? A: I think it depends on what issue it is. It depends on who she is reporting for. For example, there are some news stations that are considered to be more conservative or more liberal.
Q: Hypothetically, you're pro life, a well known reporter is pro choice, would that effect her credibility in your eyes? A: No, because we're all entitled to our opinions. She can have her opinion and I can have mine. As long as she reports neutrally, I can definitely take her message.
Q: Do news organizations have the right to keep their journalists from participating in controversial causes? Yes, for example if you're working for a conservative newspaper and your reporter wants to go to a [pro choice] rally it sort of contradicts her home firm, where she's working for, so you might want to restrain her from attending such activities.
Here is what Professor David Lau, Communication Director of Oakland University said:
Q: Do you think this is a conflict of interest for a journalist to participate in events like this outside of work? A: To a certain extent it depends on how close the controversial cause is to writing column. For example, I worked closely with Alex Cherup who was the editor for the "Mouthing Off" column for the Oakland Post, student newspaper and he participated in anti-war protests. I have no problem with this at all. Likewise, I have no problem with sports writers participating in social protests. However, I do struggle a bit with whether it would be wise for the education columnist to participate in pro-choice, or anti-abortion protests. Abortion issues do get connected with education issues especially in the arena of sex education. And, I can see how participation in such protests might skew a "fair handling" of educational positions.
Q: Whether they are writing for a column or outside of work, would you rather a journalist be open with their beliefs and political/social associations, or rather be discreet? A: To be honest, I'm divided on this one. On one hand I like the idea of an open straight forwardness. On the other hand, I think it is pretty clear where your average columnist is coming from and I'm not sure they should be encouraged to be more "heavy handed" than they often already are.
Q: If the reporter attended the rally, would that damage the credibility of her or the newspaper? A: I guess the more I think about this. I'd like to see a social experiment play out in which some newspapers allow this, be open about having such a policy and then evaluating how it plays out.
Q: Do you think newspapers have the right to prohibit journalists to participate in certain organizations? Why? Are there any exceptions? A: Certainly a point can be made that they have no right to prohibit any writer's ability to be a fully entitled citizen.
As Editor in Chief at the Oakland Post, Lindsey Wojcik is on the fence with this issue. While she is uncomfortable with staff participating in controversial causes, she doesn’t expect to know or control everything her staff does. She seems to favor being able to make a decision before the paper’s credibility may be at stake. At least if an employee is honest with their political involvement and can provide a reasonable argument for it, she could defend her decision by using the employees explanation of circumstances to clear any fog in the air.
Q: One of your reporters wants to march in a rally for a controversial cause, if it is not related to their beat, do you think that it is a conflict of interest for them to do this outside of work? A:This is an ethical issue that I'm on the fence about. I think it could go either way depending on the situation. We actually had a very similar issue last year. One of our editors had strong opinions about the Iraq War and was active in anti-war protests. While politics were certainly a major part of what the editor wrote for our paper, he wasn't technically going to cover an anti-war rally for our newspaper. A compromise was made between him and the managing editor and editor in chief. He could only attend events that were off campus and could not participate in any on campus anti-war rallies. At the time, I felt the compromise was okay for the editors involved but it still bothered me that he was participating in the events because I believe it affected some of his written work, even if what he was writing was considered opinion. But like I said it really depends on the situation.
Q:Which do you prefer: Your journalists/employees to be open about their political/social associations with their public (not necessarily in their writing, but in general), or be discreet. A: I think journalists can be both open and discreet about their political/social associations with the public. They don't necessarily need to use their associations to persuade public to feel a certain way (in writing or in general) but there is nothing wrong with having the information. There are some extremes with this, like the editor of The Washington Post who never votes but then had very close ties to JFK. I wouldn't expect anyone on the Post to go to that extreme but I would like them to be honest about their associations. Case in point,one of our interns works for Southfield Mayor Brenda Lawerance. Everyone knows this and I'm sure it has some affect on his political stance but he doesn't hide that fact from the public and it doesn't affect his involvement with The Oakland Post.
Q: If a Postie wanted to be involved in something that you feel would damage the credibility of that employee, or the paper, would you prohibit them from participating? Explain your decision. A: This is also one of those decisions that would be made based on the situation at hand and I think whether or not the involvement was on campus or off campus would affect my decision in prohibiting from participating. If they wanted to be involved with something on campus that would damage their credibility or that of the newspaper, I might consider prohibiting them from being involved. The person would have to give me an extremely reasonable explanation for wanting to be involved in order for me to consider allowing them to do something that could damage their reputation or that of the newspaper. But I can't control what college students do off campus in their personal lives so it would be hard for me to control their participation in something off campus but if I was aware, again I'd need a reasonable explanation for why they were participating before making a decision.
Education reporter, Sandra Nelson, lost her job with the News Tribune in Tacoma, Washington after she refused to stop her off the job political activities on behalf of gay rights. On October 6, 1997, the Supreme Court rejected without comment in appeal from Sandra Nelson.
- Newsroom Brain
pure satire
This is an unethically posed and self shot photo of a journalist scared to reveal that she loves trees even though there is a story on the front page that the city plans to cut some down.
4 comments:
Here are responses from Bashir Audu, an intern project engineer and student, who did not wish to be filmed:
Q: A well known reporter who wants to march in a controversial cause or topic, say a reporter who wants to march for pro choice, do you think it's a conflict of interest?
A: Yes, I do because being a reporter, you have to in my opinion...maintain some sort of neutral stance and if you're pro or against, your message will not be well received by people of the opposing view because they know your stance and they know you're not going to give a no-biased judgment
Q: Would you rather the journalists be open or discreet about their views when they report?
A: I'd rather they be discreet. Because...if you get a reporter that is tilting to one side of the issue, you never get a good view of what's going on.
Q: What if they're view on something has nothing to do with what they are reporting on? Do you think her belief in something unrelated effects the credibility of her reporting or the newspaper she works for?
A: No, no because every reporter is going to have views on issues and so you can't bring all the issues up to what she is currently writing about in her job.
Q: Do you think by her attending controversial events like these would damage credibility?
A: I think it depends on what issue it is. It depends on who she is reporting for. For example, there are some news stations that are considered to be more conservative or more liberal.
Q: Hypothetically, you're pro life, a well known reporter is pro choice, would that effect her credibility in your eyes?
A: No, because we're all entitled to our opinions. She can have her opinion and I can have mine. As long as she reports neutrally, I can definitely take her message.
Q: Do news organizations have the right to keep their journalists from participating in controversial causes?
Yes, for example if you're working for a conservative newspaper and your reporter wants to go to a [pro choice] rally it sort of contradicts her home firm, where she's working for, so you might want to restrain her from attending such activities.
Here is what Professor David Lau, Communication Director of Oakland University said:
Q: Do you think this is a conflict of interest for a journalist to participate in events like this outside of work?
A: To a certain extent it depends on how close the controversial cause is to writing column. For example, I worked closely with Alex Cherup who was the editor for the "Mouthing Off" column for the Oakland Post, student newspaper and he participated in anti-war protests. I have no problem with this at all. Likewise, I have no problem with sports writers participating in social protests. However, I do struggle a bit with whether it would be wise for the education columnist to participate in pro-choice, or anti-abortion protests. Abortion issues do get connected with education issues especially in the arena of sex education. And, I can see how participation in such protests might skew a "fair handling" of educational positions.
Q: Whether they are writing for a column or outside of work, would you rather a journalist be open with their beliefs and political/social associations, or rather be discreet?
A: To be honest, I'm divided on this one. On one hand I like the idea of an open straight forwardness. On the other hand, I think it is pretty clear where your average columnist is coming from and I'm not sure they should be encouraged to be more "heavy handed" than they often already are.
Q: If the reporter attended the rally, would that damage the credibility of her or the newspaper?
A: I guess the more I think about this. I'd like to see a social experiment play out in which some newspapers allow this, be open about having such a policy and then evaluating how it plays out.
Q: Do you think newspapers have the right to prohibit journalists to participate in certain
organizations? Why? Are there any exceptions?
A: Certainly a point can be made that they have no right to prohibit any writer's ability to be a fully entitled citizen.
As Editor in Chief at the Oakland Post, Lindsey Wojcik is on the fence with this issue. While she is uncomfortable with staff participating in controversial causes, she doesn’t expect to know or control everything her staff does. She seems to favor being able to make a decision before the paper’s credibility may be at stake. At least if an employee is honest with their political involvement and can provide a reasonable argument for it, she could defend her decision by using the employees explanation of circumstances to clear any fog in the air.
Q: One of your reporters wants to march in a rally for a controversial
cause, if it is not related to their beat, do you think that it is a conflict of interest for them to do this outside of work?
A:This is an ethical issue that I'm on the fence about. I think it could go either way depending on the situation. We actually had a very similar issue last year. One of our editors had strong opinions about the Iraq War and was active in anti-war protests. While politics were certainly a major part of what the editor wrote for our paper, he wasn't technically going to cover an anti-war rally for our newspaper. A compromise was made between him and the managing editor and editor in chief. He could only attend events that were off campus and could not participate in any on campus anti-war rallies. At the time, I felt the compromise was okay for the editors involved but it still bothered me that he was participating in the events because I believe it affected some of his written work, even if what he was writing was considered opinion. But like I said it really depends on the situation.
Q:Which do you prefer: Your journalists/employees to be open about their political/social associations with their public (not necessarily in their writing, but in general), or be discreet.
A: I think journalists can be both open and discreet about their political/social associations with the public. They don't necessarily need to use their associations to persuade public to feel a certain way (in writing or in general) but there is nothing wrong with having the information. There are some extremes with this, like the editor of The Washington Post who never votes but then had very close ties to JFK. I wouldn't expect anyone on the Post to go to that extreme but I would like them to be honest about their associations. Case in point,one of our interns works for Southfield Mayor Brenda Lawerance. Everyone knows this and I'm sure it has some affect on his political stance but he doesn't hide that fact from the public and it doesn't affect his involvement with The Oakland Post.
Q: If a Postie wanted to be involved in something that you feel would damage the credibility of that employee, or the paper, would you prohibit them from participating? Explain your decision.
A: This is also one of those decisions that would be made based on the situation at hand and I think whether or not the involvement was on campus or off campus would affect my decision in prohibiting from participating. If they wanted to be involved with something on campus that would damage their credibility or that of the newspaper, I might consider prohibiting them from being involved. The person would have to give me an extremely reasonable explanation for wanting to be involved in order for me to consider allowing them to do something that could damage their reputation or that of the newspaper. But I can't control what college students do off campus in their personal lives so it would be hard for me to control their participation in something off campus but if I was aware, again I'd need a reasonable explanation for why they were participating before making a decision.
Post a Comment