Blurring ethical lines

It was my first day as a reporter and I was sitting in the Missouri Senate in my newly purchased suit thinking I was one of the cool kids. I got to sit at the reporters’ table, right between the Associated Press and Post-Dispatch reporters. A senator took the floor to welcome his next- door neighbor, a cute little girl in a black dress with bright red hair, as the page girl for the day. As she bounced onto the floor she waved and everyone began to clap for the young girl, or so I thought. I joined in with the applause and then realized I was the only reporter clapping. “We don’t clap for anyone,” my editor whispered behind me. Embarrassed, I stopped. But then I began to think: was I really being unethical by showing a political bias by clapping for the seven-year-old girl? I don’t think so.

Journalists will face much more ethical decisions throughout their career. Ethics is the heart of journalism, and credibility is the main ingredient to a successful reporter. Technology has and will continue to change journalism. And as technology continues to develop, so will the ethical dilemmas and choices that journalists will confront.

The advancement of technology blurs the line of what is considered ethical in journalism. Sometimes technology helps and improves news stories, and other times it compromises coverage. Technology has changed how people want their news, and quickness often trumps accuracy. It takes time to verify spelling of names, exactness of statistics, and make sure proper style and grammar is used. Editors become so wrapped up in being “first” they overlook problem spots in a story, or don’t ask the ever-important question: “How do you know this?” This is where mistakes come in, and mistakes lead to lose of credibility. Sending breaking news quickly to people’s cell phones, e-mails and Blackberries, should not be a goal. The goal should be sending breaking news accurately.

Technology has also made reporters less aggressive with their stories. Why attend a boring five-hour long committee meeting when you know the minutes will be available immediately after the meeting online? Reporting is about being in the field, witnessing what’s happening, meeting victims and telling a story. Not sitting behind a desk, relying on what others tell you. Jason Leopold hit the nail on the head when he told new reporters the importance of cultivating sources. “You guys need to go out our and start cultivating sources. Everyone knows what that means right? You need to befriend the cashier at the grocery store, the cops, they guy at the newsstand. Those are the people who are going to tip you off” (143). Too often reporters will search online for a discussion group or social network on a specific topic to locate sources instead of cultivating relationships. Often people found online will have a hidden agenda, and not provide accurate information.

Technology can also help journalists too. The Internet can provide a quick means to help verify certain facts, the spelling of a name or the correct address for the restaurant that burned down. The plethora of professional research available online also helps reporters become quick experts on a topic, which will help increase the thoroughness of the story. Technology can help improve accuracy. It allows a reporter to double, triple check facts.


We’ve all done it. After working on a big story reporters compare their story to what other news outlets put out. In my opinion, there is nothing wrong with comparing your story to what other reporters produced. It helps budding reporters develop into a more solid reporter by finding holes in their story, seeing different angles and approaches used, and what sources others cited. But it becomes unethical to take information that other reporters worked to gather and use it in your story. Everyone tries to be first with breaking a story, but most of the time someone will beat you to it. So is the information that they worked to dig up fair game for you to use, even if you verify it yourself?

In the newsroom where I worked this summer there was one editor who on a weekly basis would tell a reporter, “if they’re dumb enough to put it on the Internet, you can use it to your advantage.” He was referring to the home or spouses work number of a source a reporter was trying to get in contact with. The Internet gives us almost immediate access to personal information that many people are not even aware exists. The ability to Google a person, or mapquest a location helps, but how far is too far? What if you stumble across a chatroom or discussion board bashing one of your sources, do you use the information?

Reporters have to be careful with how they obtain and use information. As ethical standards fall in other professions and industries, journalists have the obligation to maintain high ethical standards.