Truth versus Harm
Following up on our discussion in class please write a short position paper on the following question:
Was Will McAvoy right to insist on having the last word in the interview with Nick Santorum’s assistant?
Before presenting your position carefully review the interview and go over the course readings and the class slides. Follow the decision-making model we discussed in class to analyze the news anchors actions.
The questions below will also help you develop a well crafted, and thought through argument:
What are the core principles of journalism ethics? What values are considered most important in reporting the news?
How well does the new editorial policy of Will and his team reflect these ethical principles and values?
How consistently has Will applied these principles in the interview? Did he live up to the aim of providing truthful and important information? How and why? How much thought did he give to the consequences of his line of questioning? Is Will’s aggressive way of interviewing justified in the name of truth?
Compare the ethical implications of the interview from a consequentialist and a non-consequentialist perspective. Does any of these moral theories support Wills behaviour? Or does he violate the main principles of both?
Where does the commitment to truth end and respect for the dignity of others begin?
And what harm is caused if journalists disregard the loyalty of individuals towards others, even if they appear implausible or politically motivated?
Does the overall benefit of exposing the racism and homophobia of a presidential candidate justify Wills actions? Why or why not?
How could Will have achieved his goal differently?
Would greater sensibility towards the long-standing history of black discrimination and a more careful assessment of Will’s own power position have changed the direction and outcome of the interview? If you think so, explain how.
Format: Blog post on Medium
Length: 800 words
Deadline: Friday, February 1st 10 a.m.
Grading Criteria:
To gain the maximum of points you need to closely follow the briefing and the decision-making model we used in class. Support your analysis with quotes from the course readings. Include at least 3 properly referenced quotes using in-text references and an end-bibliography in APA style and 2 visual references to the interview. The quality of your argument will be assessed for logic and clarity and for the extent to which you have supported it by a systematic analysis as demonstrated in class. For details see the grading table in the syllabus
