Ethics

I think the first article on fact checking is very interesting. A key part of being a good journalist is always checking your facts before reporting it to the people. This idea of making the people check the facts for themselves is just plain laziness on David Gregory’s part. When people are watching a TV show such as Meet the Press they expect to get the facts the first time. I know I wouldn’t want to take the time and look up all the information that was presented to me just to make sure that it’s all factual. This would instill a sense of distrust for me and the show. With Meet the Press being such a popular news show, I would be hoping that most of the information coming from these authoritative voices was not misleading.

I think ProPublica’s idea of getting the news out to people accurately before worrying about costs is a moral approach. But at the same time, how does one secure a career working for such a company? How are journalists who choose to write for the company earning a living for themselves?

In the article about the writer for the New Jersey Devils, I understand some of the ethical issues being presented here. Many people would most likely feel that anything written by Eric Marin would be biased toward the Devils’ team. At the same time, it’s not always easy to get reporters to cover every game or sporting event out there. If Marin wants to provide a story for the Gannett when they need to fill a gap I think it should be allowed. An editor at the paper can read through the article themselves to make sure that it is objective before submitting it. I think the executive editor makes a good point as well. They make it clear that the article was written by a Devils’ employee and the readers don’t seem to mind. So why make a big deal out of something that’s doesn’t seem to be a big deal?