Ethics

This week I did a presentation on media ethics. The information we discussed was quite interesting. There was a section in Reading and Writing that really helped me out. I was in a group with two other people and as a group we talked about a definition for media ethics and compared it to taste. We also talked about the effects of editing photos and the dangers of irrational journalism.


My part was media ethics vs. taste. Ethics has to do with being truthful and taste is a matter of thing we don't want to see (i.e. sex, violence, etc). It's not ethical to show a photo that has been altered to create a different meaning. News sources loose credibility when they get caught publicizing altered photos. An example is the cover of OJ Simpson that Times Magazine ran. The altered OJ's mug shot to make him look guiltier by making the photo more black. They probably wouldn't have got caught if Newsweek hadn't run the same picture on their cover, unaltered. The public knew there was something wrong when they saw the photos side by side.

It's not unethical to show a graphic photo of violence but it is questionable in taste. People need to have strong reasons to show photos like that. People don't want to see explicit violence or sex on TV or in the newspaper but sometimes it raises awareness. This doesn't mean we can't find more mellow, non-violent photos to raise awareness. Photos are powerful because the hit us in our gut.

I think an ethics lesson in a classroom could be extremely informational. The teacher could create a presentation containing definitions of ethics, taste, and anything else they feel applies. Included in the presentation could be pictures and video of altered media. The teacher could explain if the material is ethical or not and discuss with the class why. This lesson would be most effective with lots of discussion. The teacher could ask the students to think of media they have found to be questionable or without taste.