Communication and Media Ethics Issues (STI PDF)

AS2207 ISSUES RELATED TO COMMUNICATION AND MEDIA ETHICS Transparency has emerged as the New Normal. A state, institutions, the market, procedures, logic, and even society as a whole should all be transparent. Transparency seems to be becoming more important. It has become a catch...

AS2207 ISSUES RELATED TO COMMUNICATION AND MEDIA ETHICS Transparency has emerged as the New Normal. A state, institutions, the market, procedures, logic, and even society as a whole should all be transparent. Transparency seems to be becoming more important. It has become a catchphrase that has outlived its original institutional habitat of a state. It may even become a global standard. Transparency The concept of transparency can be correlated to accountability and credibility. In general, here are the basic definition of accountability, transparency, and credibility: Accountability, which contends that we owe it to stakeholders to explain ourselves and our judgments. Transparency presupposes that we should be as honest as possible about ourselves, our motivations, and our decision-making processes. Credibility is the degree to which people trust other people, organizations, and institutions. These concepts are interconnected and, in the digital era, are increasingly acknowledged to be linked. Others are more likely to demand accountability, transparency is regarded as a method to replace "objectivity" in certain media organizations, and trustworthiness has grown more challenging. Accountability The term "accountability" comes from two Latin words that mean, "to add up." This idea of "reckoning" might be appealing because it makes you think of standing alone in front of a jury and having to explain your irreversible actions. Your heart could be the judge. Most likely, that judge will be a jury made up of people who want to know what happened. When you hear the word "accountable," you might think of accountancy, which is the work of making financial standards, figuring out how much a company is worth and how well it follows those standards, and presenting the results. The comparison is useful for ethics because both financial accounting and ethical accounting involve thinking about the bottom line in an objective way. Even though philosophical discussions about moral responsibility can be confusing, we can assume that people should be held responsible for their actions. This is especially true for mass communicators who choose to work in this field. Morally mature people think about responsibility when making decisions. If there isn't a good reason for something, it may be morally questionable. But a reason could be right even if the majority of stakeholders don't agree with it. Legally speaking, responsibility is often confused with responsibility. In mass communication, there is no way to separate the ideas of social responsibility and accountability. The Hutchins Commission on Press Freedom in 1947 said that freedom and responsibility go hand in hand: "Its moral right will depend on its acceptance of this accountability" (p. 19). Many news organizations felt like their freedom was being taken away by the commission's findings (Blanchard, 1977). In the marketplace, accountability happens best when people don't listen to irresponsible speakers. However, in the age of cable and the internet, accountability may not happen when people accept or reject content that supports their values. In fact, some people like unethical media because of this very reason. 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 1 of 6  AS2207 The word "responsibility" can also be used in a legal sense, like when someone admits fault for a mistake. Law and ethics are two different things, but when it comes to responsibility, they often overlap. The context of accountability – People behave differently when they know they are being observed and will be held responsible. Your syllabus explains how accountable you are for the topic, how it will be assessed, and how your grade will reflect your accountability. Accountability may work in both directions. At the conclusion of the semester, you will most likely be asked to evaluate your instructor anonymously. Consistently good or bad evaluations should influence how the course is taught in the future, and they may influence whether or not your teacher's position is retained. Despite the fact that students and instructors have varying degrees of control over one another, these accountability mechanisms may persuade everyone to do the right thing. Accountability is not always simple to come by in the real world or in the media. "Who am I responsible to?" is the most fundamental question to ask concerning responsibility. Both to yourself and to others. Accountability to self – You must be accountable to yourself. Your beliefs about what is good and wrong are formed by your genes, upbringing, education, and life experiences. Making wise judgments includes understanding that you must live with oneself both above and below the neck (ethics) (morality). It's simple to explain why you made a decision that aligns with your principles. However, if you make a decision that contradicts your principles, you will experience cognitive dissonance, which is the discomfort you feel when your actions do not match your beliefs or when your brain has two opposing concepts at the same time (Festinger, 1957). To bring your ideas back into sync, you must either (1) reject one of the conflicting thoughts or (2) explain (or make meaning of) your thoughts or actions. When you're alone, it might be difficult to know what to do. It may be more difficult to answer an ethical dilemma at work, where you may not have as much flexibility. A burned conscience, also known as moral callousness, is a sign of a lack of morality. An excess of conscience, on the other hand, results in unnecessary guilt. Persons usually complain about people in the media because they seem to be heartless. Examples of these are the following: Journalists who cover crimes and tragedies may lose their sense of tact and make the people they photograph or talk to feel even worse. Bloggers who don't think about the other side may become hypocrites in the long run, defending the actions of politicians or other people they like while criticizing the same actions in their opponents. People who work in public relations may feel bad the first time they tell a white lie to "spin" the truth, but after they've done it a thousand times, they don't even realize how far their moral compass has moved as they enter the world of "organized lying" (Edwards, 2020). People who work in advertising may "greenwash" the products they sell by making ads for "green" items that are really "throwaway" items that don't do much to help the environment. Entertainment workers who worked their way to the top may have been upset by how they were treated in their first jobs, like if they had to do unpaid internships or if their bosses were mean to them. But when they get to the top, they don't change the system that hurt them because it now helps them. People who use social media (social media practitioners) may get noticed when they say something funny about a celebrity's flaws, but then they post meaner and meaner things in order to stay in the spotlight. 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 2 of 6  AS2207 Internal responsibility may help you find out what you really think and whether or not you performed ethically. It may also be harmful when you have to reject what you know to be correct in order to live with yourself. A person with a high sense of self-accountability may notice both the obvious ways they can be tempted to do something wrong and the subtle changes that occur over time as they and their circumstances change. Accountability to others – It becomes more difficult to answer the issue after we have moved beyond accountability to ourselves. Communicators are accountable to the public, the government, and their colleagues. But it's unclear what we mean by "public." Kohlberg's (1981) cognitive-social method may be utilized to address the question, "Who am I accountable to?" Pre-conventional moral growth is motivated by self-interest. People at these levels may believe they are solely answerable to those who can reward or punish them (Level 1) or to those who can aid them in their self-interests (Level 2). (Level 2). They may apologize only when not apologizing would have a personal impact on them—and that apology may not be sincere, but only a means to a goal. At this level, journalists may feel answerable to managers who may dismiss or promote them, or to sources who can make or break a story. People in the entertainment sector may feel answerable to superiors or more powerful individuals, such as well-known performers, to whom they might attach their wagon. Conventional moral development levels are about compliance and obeying the rules. As previously noted, many of the regulations entail responsibility, particularly when minimal requirements are broken. In matters involving libel, invasion of privacy, copyright breaches, and other related concerns, jurors determine culpability for mass communicators. Persuasive communicators' legal rights have evolved as legislators, regulators, and courts established limitations on commercial speech and devised means to hold offenders legally responsible for their conduct. Post-conventional stages of moral growth are concerned with societal responsibility. In order to convey a bigger reality, they may force a journalist to lie or a filmmaker to depict brutality unflinchingly. Transparency and Accountability Transparency is defined by the Oxford Dictionary as "that which is transparent; a transparent thing or medium" as well as "the state or condition of being transparent; perviousness to light; diaphaneity, pellucidity." As a consequence, it refers to a "quality or condition" or a "object," specifically "that which is transparent." It produces visibility when invisibility or opacity are equally possibilities; it allows us to see through it. It is assumed that the individual is looking through a transparent object, such as a window, at anything on the other side. As a consequence, visibility in the form of transparency is established, irrespective of a physical barrier between the beholder and the target. Transparency has come to represent a modern, surprisingly difficult, and expanding socio-legal ideal based on this physical characteristic's metaphorical parallel. It is critical to emphasize that when considered as an ideal, transparency becomes a normative phrase. It has a subconscious "pro- attitude" in its favor, even if it is not reflected in norms and rules. In other words, the foundation of an assertion, such as "transparency is helpful" or "transparency promotes legitimacy," must be explored. However, transparency is often used as a descriptive term, both literally and metaphorically. 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 3 of 6  AS2207 The term transparency appears often in our language. Transparency varies from other terms with similar meanings that apply to knowledge accessibility (such as publicity, access to information, openness, and so on) because it has significant psychological and social ramifications. Transparency, in my view, has several connotations since it has a quasi-symbolic character that both provides visibility and eludes the gaze. Transparency is a pure medium, a tool, and a message, or so it seems. This leads to indifference toward the message being given; transparency is seen positively, unfavorably, and maybe neutrally at times. Transparency, according to media ethicist Patrick Plaisance, also refers to the messenger's intentions and the openness of the process by which messages are formed, thus it entails more than just informing people about the speaker's genuine message. It suggests that communicators see audiences as ends in themselves rather than as a tool for persuasion. True transparency will limit power moves and promote a participatory democracy by reining in lobbying and persuasion. We are more likely to trust folks who are honest and responsible if we agree with their explanations. Even if they disagree with the decision, folks with higher moral standards may admire solid arguments and transparency. Using David Berlo's (1960) communication model, which describes how a source provides a message over a channel to a receiver and receives feedback, is a useful tool for demonstrating transparency features in media (Roberts, 2007). Some of these principles are institutionally focused as we investigate how a particular medium or media organization is transparent. Other concepts are aimed at a single decision-maker, whether inside or outside of a media firm. Transparency begins at the origin of the message. The public cannot hold mass communicators accountable until they understand who they are and what motivates them. This suggests ethical failings when: Journalists fail to disclose actual or possible conflicts of interest. Public relations professionals deploy "Astroturf" and "sock puppet" campaigns. According to author Sue Curry Jansen, public relations "violates basic rules of democratic discourse" by disguising itself from the public, who recognizes advertising but is less likely to identify PR (Jansen, 2017, p. 3). Advertisers construct "stealth commercials" so that the audience does not know it is being sold to, or they attempt to mislead customers with sales pitches sent in envelopes disguised as official government paperwork. Entertainers utilize concealed cameras to gather video or produce "reality" programs that are merely realistic in name. Social media accounts utilize computer "bots" to deliver messages that receivers believe are sent by people (de Lima Salge & Berente, 2017) People "used" by mass communicators to generate messages as well as message recipients often have a right to know the motivations behind the messengers. The problem of audience reaction before, during, and after the communication is brought to light by source transparency as well. How can they effectively respond if they are unaware of the source or its purpose? For journalists, this entails inviting reader feedback on stories or soliciting their assistance in locating potential sources while the story is being reported. For public relations professionals, this may start with two-way symmetrical practices with the publics defined by the PR 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 4 of 6  AS2207 professional, but it proceeds to considerations of stakeholders who may be powerless but are affected by the campaign. Advertising requires a clear understanding of the legitimate seller. The first step in message transparency is determining why the message is being delivered. Informing, persuading, and entertaining are all common goals of communication, but the listener must be aware of which of the three is the real objective. The examination of truth raises possible ethical concerns with covert advertising, persuasion masquerading as "objective" news broadcasts, or broadcasters that feature their own entertainment programs in "news" reports without disclosing the relationship (Coffey & Cleary, 2011). The concept of message transparency for: Journalists and bloggers imply that the audience understands the degree to which the writer can vouch for the material utilized, the sources of the information, the reason for employing anonymous sources, and if the raw footage was edited or otherwise altered. Persuaders implies that the audience is aware that the information was designed for that aim. As the number of reporters falls and more material developed by public relations practitioners is utilized by news organizations, it is becoming a more caveat emptor environment in which consumers must identify for themselves that the information they consume is meant to persuade or sell to them. Entertainers refers to filmmakers and other content creators who inform viewers where truth stops and fiction starts, a boundary that may get blurred in "based on a true tale" material. Social media professionals imply that viewers understand if they are being "sold" a message, including whether the sender authored the message, cited another source, or borrowed from someone else on social media. Channel transparency suggests that some ways to deliver messages can be more transparent than others because they allow more feedback. The internet’s rise of the “chat room,” and open comment sections on news and elsewhere, gives mass communicators many options in transparency. Transparent communicators make it easy for the audience to talk back to the messenger—and to each other. The question for communicators is what lines, if any, to draw letting the audience criticize the messenger, to require audience members to identify themselves, and to send messages that are racist, sexist, crude, wildly off topic, based on rumor and not fact, etc. News organizations and others allowed audience members to comment on news stories and other content, hitting a peak in the mid- 2010s but on the decline since then. Some media organizations found that audience misbehavior—a term called “dark participation” (Quandt, 2018)—let trolls undermine goodwill and tempted media workers to respond in kind (Nelson, 2021). Receiver transparency is concerned with audience members' knowledge of themselves. Audience members must understand themselves, their capacity to tolerate discordant media messages, how conscious they are of their own belief frameworks, and their degree of media literacy. When audience members understand themselves and how the media works, they may be more rational, engaged, and formidable in demanding accountability. It also helps when both senders and recipients of communications understand themselves and communicate their rationale for criticism. Good feedback helps everyone comprehend the problems and is done in the public interest; negative feedback often has an ulterior goal (Petley, 2013). Credibility and Accountability Beyond the moral duty to be responsible to oneself and others, mass communicators often have a more pragmatic reason to be accountable: believability. When audiences trust messengers and their 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 5 of 6  AS2207 messages, mass communicators—whether informers, persuaders, or entertainers—are more likely to succeed. With a literature that is "plentiful, conflicting, and complex," the term "credibility" originates from the Latin word that meaning "to believe" (Self & Roberts, 2019, p. 435). Trust, dependability, and like are examples of related concepts. Regardless of the message's veracity or the messenger's morality, message receivers make the final choice on credibility. It bears repeating: credibility is what others think of you, not who you are. Unfortunately, for mass communicators, perception often becomes reality, thus trustworthiness requires particular consideration. References: Bache, T. (2019, April 4). What is impunity? - Archives - IFEX. IFEX. https://ifex.org/campaigns/no-impunity/what-is-impunity/ Black, J., & Roberts, C. (2022). Doing ethics in media: Theories and practical applications (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis. Bobbitt, R. (2017). Exploring communication law: A socratic approach. Burrett, T., & Kingston, J. (2019). Press freedom in contemporary Asia. Caristi, D., Davie, W. R., & Lee, L. T. (2021). Communication law: Practical applications in the digital age. Routledge. The elements of journalism. (2021, July 15). American Press Institute. https://www.americanpressinstitute.org/journalism-essentials/what-is- journalism/elements-journalism/ From repression to oppression: news journalism in Turkey 2013–2018. (n.d.). Sage Pub. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/0163443720916407 Impunity: Elements for an Empirical Concept. (n.d.). University of Minnesota Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.umn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1091&context=lawineq#:~:text=impunity%3A%20%22Impunity%20means %20the%20impossibility,%2D Milestones: 1866–1898. (n.d.). Office of the Historian. https://history.state.gov/milestones/1866-1898/yellow-journalism Research guides:. (2022, 20). Research Guides at University of Michigan Library. https://guides.lib.umich.edu/fakenews Ross, S. D., Reynolds, A., & Trager, R. (2019). The law of journalism and mass communication (7th ed.). CQ Press. "The spate of killings of Filipino journalists and the gravamen of impunity with the law". (n.d.). Commission on Human Rights – Dignity of All. https://chr.gov.ph/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/HRA-CHR-A2005-007-The-Spate-of-Killings-of-Filipino-Journalists-and-the-Gravamen-of- Impunity-with-the-Law.pdf 06 Handout 1 *Property of STI  [email protected] Page 6 of 6