2 Classical Theories Applied to Journalism
Let’s open with another hypothetical situation.
Study the following presentation slides by using the forward button or clicking on sections of the control bar.
FOUR ETHICAL THEORIES
After you’ve studied the hypothetical situation above, it’s time for a brief summary of each ethical theory mentioned in the presentation:
Rule-Based Thinking – In a rule-based approach to decision making, a single ethical rule, such as truth or compassion, overrides all other considerations. Some ethicists use the word “duty” instead of “rule.”
In philosophy courses, rule-based thinking is often connected to the German philosopher Immanuel Kant or the term “deontology.”
For many journalists, truth is more important than any other ethical value. In most instances, journalists and media professional journalists should be truthful in their work
But can too much truth lead some media stories to a negative end that doesn’t benefit anyone?
Ends-Based Thinking – In an ends-based approach, the journalist weighs the various ethical values that are in conflict rather than following a single rule. It is sometimes connected to the philosophical term “utilitarianism.”
Rather than relying on a single rule, someone using ends-based thinking will consider all aspects of a situation and make a decision that leads to the greatest good for the most people.
The Golden Rule – You may already be familiar with the Golden Rule as a religious maxim, but it can also be used as an approach to ethical decision making. The Biblical advice attributed to Jesus is to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
The Golden Rule seems straightforward, but in situations involving multiple viewpoints, it can be difficult to define who the “others” are.
The Golden Mean – Aristotle’s golden mean seeks a balance between two extremes. Advocates of the golden mean argue that it can help us avoid excess by finding a middle ground for difficult decisions.
The distinction between rule-based and ends-based ethics can be fuzzy. If you’re confused, or you just want a lighthearted and entertaining video tutorial that includes Batman, here’s a great resource from PBS:
The video uses simple examples to compare rule-based (or Kantian) thinking with ends-based (or utilitarian) thinking. The video’s narrator says that in rule-based thinking, “There are some lines that good people do not cross,” while in utilitarianism, “We should act always so as to produce the greatest good for the greatest number.” The video’s framing example, about whether Batman should kill the Joker, is enlightening.
APPLYING THE THEORIES
Let’s return to our opening hypothetical. Do you honor your friend’s dying wishes or donate the money to a Haitian relief fund? Is there another option? Here are possible applications of the four theories we’ve covered.
Rule-Based Thinking – The decision depends on which rule you choose to follow. If the primary rule is honesty and loyalty (such as keeping a promise), you will consider it your duty to give the money to the University of Alabama. Doing anything else might make you feel dishonest or less honorable.
On the other hand, if you emphasize compassion as your primary rule, you can argue that rule-based thinking leads you to donate the money to Haitian relief. Compassion trumps loyalty.
Ends-Based Thinking – What leads to the greatest good for the most people? Using an ends-based approach, we would likely conclude that more people will benefit from giving the money to Haitian relief funds. In our hypothetical scenario, more than a million people need immediate assistance in Haiti.
The Golden Rule – Applying the Golden Rule is tricky in this case because there are multiple stakeholders in the decision. Does “others” apply to the deceased friend or the people in Haiti?
Most of us would want our friends to honor our dying wishes. On the other hand, you would probably want others to help you however possible if a natural disaster left you homeless.
Application of the Golden Rule is further complicated because your friend did not know about the crisis in Haiti before she died. Would that knowledge have changed her instructions to you?
The Golden Mean – Some situations involve a stark either-or choice that limits the application of the golden mean. In this case, however, we can easily find a middle ground between the two extremes.
Dividing the donations, half to Alabama athletics and half to Haitian relief, would be a golden-mean approach.
JOURNALISTIC APPLICATION
Now that you have the gist of these four theories, let’s move on to a journalistic case example.
The death of basketball star Kobe Bryant forced many reporters and editors to make difficult ethical decisions. How much of Bryant’s past, including sexual assault charges, should have been included in coverage of his death? Read the following two articles published soon after Bryant’s death:
• Kobe Bryant died an inspiration to many — but not all. And we can’t ignore why. – NBC News
And if you need broader historical perspective, you can read this 2003 coverage:
• Kobe Bryant charged with sexual assault – CNN
After you’ve read about this case study, we can try to apply the four ethical theories:
1. Rule-Based Thinking – If truth is the guiding rule, then revisiting and publishing information about Bryant’s past seems appropriate. Even those who worship Bryant as an athlete should know about the rape case.
If, however, compassion is the guiding rule, then Bryant’s flawed past may seem off limits to discuss immediately after his death. All humans are flawed, and the rape case occurred two decades earlier.
2. Ends-Based Thinking – In this case, we may not reach a broad consensus about the greatest good for the most people.
Fans of Kobe Bryant were offended by obituaries that included the rape allegation, partly because he was not found guilty as a criminal.
Advocates of the more-recent #MeToo movement, however, would argue that the rape case is part of Bryant’s legacy. As the CNN Business article noted, “Although Bryant stopped short of admitting guilt, he did acknowledge that while he viewed the encounter as consensual, his accuser did not.”
3. The Golden Rule – We’re supposed to “do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” But defining “others” in this case forces us to evaluate some “if … then” statements.
If you view “others” as those who have just died, then it seems inappropriate to detail past mistakes in an obituary. Most of us don’t want our own obituaries to detail our personal flaws.
A similar outcome may emerge if you view “others” as friends and family of the deceased, and in this case we could even include Kobe Bryant’s most passionate fans. They want to preserve their memory of the best version of the human being they honor in death.
If you view “others” as victims of sexual assault, however, then publishing a reminder of Bryant’s past indiscretion seems important. As you likely observed from the readings above, this was a polarizing case example. #MeToo advocates argued that attitudes toward predatory sexual behavior will not change unless we acknowledge and publicize problems.
4. The Golden Mean – Many news organizations used a version of this middle-ground approach in their coverage following Kobe Bryant’s death. The sexual assault case appeared in a sentence or two, usually toward the end of the obituary, making it part of the story but not a key focus.
Additional Perspectives – Quill magazine, a publication from the Society of Professional Journalists, published an in-depth analysis titled “Final Thoughts.” In the article, New Orleans writer John Pope gave this viewpoint on writing news obituaries about public figures:
It’s one of those damned if you do, damned if you don’t situations, because if you tell the truth people will say you’re disrespecting the dead. But if you tiptoe around a murky subject, people will say you’re doing a whitewash.
Pope’s quote suggests that it is difficult to use a golden-mean approach that satisfies everyone in the audience.
Brad Weismann, another journalist interviewed by Quill, stressed the importance of obituaries for recording accurate history.
Future researchers run the risk of not knowing important facts about that person. So always write an obit carefully, with an eye toward posterity.
Weismann quote suggests that writing “with an eye toward posterity” is the most important rule for obituaries.
CLOSING REVIEW
WRITE ABOUT IT
We’ll use another high-profile case example for you to apply ethical principles. First, read the following feature story, which was published in the aftermath of George Floyd’s death:
• For George Floyd, a complicated life and a notorious death – Associated Press
Then read a column by Kelly McBride, which was published by NPR:
• Did George Floyd die or was he murdered? One of many ethics questions NPR must answer – NPR
In the NPR column, focus on the section titled “Is NPR guilty of glossing over Floyd’s criminal history?” Read that section closely! It includes the following observation:
This is often at the center of the political and journalistic debates in cases where the police have killed suspects. Defenders of the cops try to demonize the suspect as much as possible. Advocates for the victims say the criminal past, or even sometimes the circumstances of the engagement between police officer and citizen, is unrelated or in bad taste.
To what extent should information about George Floyd’s prior legal problems have been included in news stories and analysis of his death?
- Apply a rule-based approach and clearly identify the ethical principle (rule) that you are following.
- Apply the ends-based approach.
- Apply the Golden Rule.
- Apply the golden mean.
- Which one of the four ethical theories provides the best (most ethical) answer in this situation? Why?
Answer each of the numbered items above in approximately three to five sentences. When possible, strengthen your responses with brief supporting content from this chapter.
