Throughout high school I always opted for the subject of Religious Education over a real subject (I went to a Catholic school, so some form of religion had to be studied). I mainly chose that subject, not only because the main form of assessment was colouring in pictures of Jesus, but also I could sleep in class without anyone noticing (I had a great maneuver that enabled me to sleep in 90% of my classes in year 12 without detection). However there came a time when we actually had to do something that could be relatively considered work (sort of), and it actually interested me (when I was awake that is.) That unit was Ethics.
My Year Twelve Religion Assignment
Now I, like many people, have gone through changes in my life whereby my ethics have changed, mainly as a way of justifying awful decisions I have made. For example, when I was younger, roughly twelve or thirteen, swearing was just about the absolute worst thing you could do around me. Enter now where I use what many could consider to be offensive vernacular, even in my university assignments. My ethical opinion concerning swearing- "Its just words, its the context of the situation that designates it to be offensive"- actual argument made by me.
Now because I'm in a journalism subject I have to relate ethics to this area, which funnily is the major reason I feel I couldn't be a news journalist. We spoke in our lecture about ranging ethical situations, the major question being "When do our ethics allow us to be journalists, and when do we stop being journalists?"
I believe in accountability, loyalty and (probably my best and worst quality) always trying to help people. And no matter what the role I have is, I don't think there could ever be a situation whereby I could deliberately ignore these ethics just for the purpose of a news story. Example A)- when the worst kind of media scum willfully invade the personal lives of a victim of crime, or their families, for the purpose of a distasteful headline. Is destroying someone else life really worth a byline on the front page?
The symbol of rebellion against the 2009 Iranian Election- Mistaken Identity
Lets look at Exhibit A) the case of Iranian women Neda Soltani, who became the face of the Iranian rebellion against the 2009 election that looked rigged as hell. The above women, Neda Agha-Soltan, was getting out of her car next to a peaceful protest turned not-so-peaceful, ultimately getting shot by Iranian police. Of course someone caught this scene on their camera phone, capturing Soltan in a compromising 'martyr' image. A thirty second Facebook search was deemed 'research' by a Western Journalist, who deemed a women named Neda Soltani was 'close-enough' to the dead women, and then posted her face and name all over the news.
Close Enough
Soltani, an English teacher who was very much alive, was plastered over the world news as a martyr, As a result she was then hunted down by the Iran government and had to bribe her way out of her own country, spending time in a German refugee camp, simply because no one Facebook messaged her "Hey, are you the dead girl?"
There was no accountability here, and very little ethical judgement about what this could do to this woman's life, especially in a dangerous and corrupt country.
Exhibit B) Kevin Carter's controversial photo 'Sudanese Girl,' which captures a starving Sudanese girl in the African heat whilst a vulture watches on. Carter watched the starving girl for twenty minutes hoping to get a photo of the vulture behind her to spread its wings.Carter later committed suicide after receiving world wide criticism for doing nothing to help the child.
The fateful photo
Media has the ability to destroy someones life, ruin someones reputation and slander someones very name. Some perhaps could justify wreaking havoc on someone else's life for a news photo or news headline, but unfortunately for my journalism career, that's something my ethics could never allow me to do.
Chris Jefferies- accused by the British media of murdering his tenant because he looks weird
No comments:
Post a Comment