The Media and Personal Information

The media has a great deal in presenting ‘facts’ about situations. This gives off false information and makes society react based on this information rather than the truth.

In journalism, an ethical dilemma is a complex issue or situation that often involves an emotional and psychological conflict between moral obligations and duties, in which to obey one would transgress the other. Within the media there are many stories that can be deemed an ethical dilemma; some more so than others. One of the most recent and prominent ethical dilemmas was the worldwide coverage surrounding the shooting of two American WBDJ journalists, Alison Parker and Adam Ward. Despite the fact that the shooter filmed the ordeal clearly showing the two slain journalists being shot, news outlets had picked it up and ran with the story, which ultimately went viral in minutes. This essay will analyse and thoroughly examine the reporting

While many may see investigative journalism as essential and an expression of our first amendment rights, when over sensationalized it can cast a dark cloud over an entire country.

News stories may be censored to protect a person and their identity. It may also be used to cover up vital national security information or graphic details. Does this prohibit the reader from knowing the full story? Perhaps, but of times, this may be for our own benefit.There is a fine line between going into gory, unsettling detail and making it seem like your everyday actuality. For example, when exposing violent brutal assault and graphic imagery. Journalists sometimes even have to self-censor their own work to keep safe, even western journalists cannot always tell the complete story when working in difficult situations. It puts them in grave danger if they do: Such as in the case of the journalists slaughtered by ISIS for uncovering secrets and political agenda behind the terrorist organisation. Censoring journalism prohibits possible important information from reaching the masses but also it is something which we may have to live with to some

The Truth is Not Always What We Want to Hear: Did the Media Go Too Far in

When watching the news, we often take what we see and hear as fact, rather than checking with other sources to make sure that what is being said is true. This is because we see these newscasters as credible sources to be listened to without question. These news channels have gained this credibility through many different methods. First, they do their research and check their facts for accuracy. They may omit some details, but never do they expressly lie. This is how they maintain credibility even when stretching a story. Second, they report on sensitive subjects and subjects we think are important. They like to phrase things to make it seem like they are they good guys and those who try to keep the information quiet are trying to keep their audience in the dark. By sharing these sensitive and controversial topics they are seen as more trustworthy, as though by telling us about these heinous acts even though they’ve been told not to is a heroic act. Third, they include interviews with people who have knowledge of the field they are discussing. For example, in the news broadcast I

There’s an overwhelming number of sources for news to reach the public. There is Fox news, CNN, BBC, NBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post, Propublica (a non-profit), and NPR, just to name eight. All these news sources impact our daily lives as we make tough decisions on things like who our president will be, what kind of food we eat or don’t eat, or what kind of people we like or don’t like. Some journalism exposes things that other people don’t want exposed. This type of journalism is called Muckraking. Jessica Mitford, an investigative journalist, described muckraking in her book, Poison Penmanship: The Art of Muckraking, as high honor in the world of journalism. Muckraking must be disassociated with the term “bad journalism”, it

It is true that it is in our nature to be curious. We want to know everything about everyone and everything, if given the chance. The media knows this, and sees an opportunity. They go out and expose every little thing about everyone. In some cases, this can be good. In most cases however, it is a disrespectful act of stirring up the drama pot.

The media reveals information to its audience in such ways that people believe it to be the truth and they don’t often question it. But what people fail to realise is that there is always more to a story than what is just presented to you. Story tellers only tell one side of a story from their

This paper’s main focus is to answer the question: “What guidance have the courts offered to help determine the point at which a journalist wrongly goes beyond reporting newsworthy information, instead reporting private, embarrassing facts that invade a person’s privacy?” To answer this question, history of the legal system, Supreme Court and past precedents must be understood and taken into consideration. The definition of privacy as well as its history in regards to its relationship with news and journalism must be understood. To do so, many Supreme Court cases will have to be taken into consideration, such as Galella v. Onassis, Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, Florida Star v. B.J.F. and Wilson v. Layne. To better understand the future, past cases will be crucial to be studied and acknowledged.

    We live in a curious age of, tabloids, talk shows, and TV sound bites that purvey a shocking type of tawdry news. These sources of scandal make a lucrative business out of outrageous headlines. But this is nothing new.  Mankind has always had burning desire for uncovering secret truths--even in the time of Shakespeare.  For as Polonius said, "If circumstances lead me, I will find/Where truth is hid, though it were hid indeed/Within the center" (2.2.158-60).  The implication is that we are somehow better off in knowing the furtive facts.

To fully understand we much focus on these three aspects of the issue. Above all, it is the media's job to publish what is true. It is its job to give the audience news and that of truthful news. The most serious concern with the media is that what they reveal to the audience must be true because as a society we are greatly influenced by what we read, hear, and see through the press. This is why libel is more serious than privacy issues. Publishing false or inaccurate information directly is the biggest, and most devastating thing a journalist or media can do. That is the

Nowadays journalists have the responsibility to report facts as accurately, objectively, and disinterestedly as is humanly possible. ‘’The, honest, self-disciplined, well-trained reporter seeks to be a propagandist for nothing but the truth’’ (Casey, 1944b).

Working within the media industry, especially as a journalist. It can sometimes be difficult and challenging as you are more than often finding yourself having to raid people’s personal lives to get a story. However, 'Is it in the public interest? ' that is the one question any journalist must ask themselves if they are to publish a story that may contain an individual’s private information.

Thousands of our nation's men and women were fighting for their country, yet the media limited the amount of information that they chose to pass on to the public. Each day the media is faced with the choice of making decisions of what news to pass on, when that news could make a significant difference in someone's life, or in the fate of our nation.