Posted on 09/15/2004 8:09:45 PM PDT by Sue Bob
Seek Truth and Report It
Journalists should be honest, fair and courageous in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Journalists should:
Test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent error. Deliberate distortion is never permissible.
Diligently seek out subjects of news stories to give them the opportunity to respond to allegations of wrongdoing.
Identify sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
Always question sources’ motives before promising anonymity. Clarify conditions attached to any promise made in exchange for information. Keep promises.
Make certain that headlines, news teases and promotional material, photos, video, audio, graphics, sound bites and quotations do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
Never distort the content of news photos or video. Image enhancement for technical clarity is always permissible. Label montages and photo illustrations.
Avoid misleading re-enactments or staged news events. If re-enactment is necessary to tell a story, label it.
Avoid undercover or other surreptitious methods of gathering information except when traditional open methods will not yield information vital to the public. Use of such methods should be explained as part of the story
Never plagiarize.
Tell the story of the diversity and magnitude of the human experience boldly, even when it is unpopular to do so.
Examine their own cultural values and avoid imposing those values on others.
Avoid stereotyping by race, gender, age, religion, ethnicity, geography, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance or social status.
Support the open exchange of views, even views they find repugnant.
Give voice to the voiceless; official and unofficial sources of information can be equally valid.
Distinguish between advocacy and news reporting. Analysis and commentary should be labeled and not misrepresent fact or context.
Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.
Recognize a special obligation to ensure that the public's business is conducted in the open and that government records are open to inspection.
----Snip----
What a total load of crap! How many reporters subscribe to these guidelines? Surely this is a parody website.
not a parody, but the SPJ is a big joke. I remember their insignificance when I was a journalism student 10 years ago.
The Society of Professional Journalists is a very real organization. They used to know the meaning of ethics but now their primary function is to give out awards.
After CBS and Blather's latest inventions, I'm questioning the existence of "Society of Professional Journalists".
Professional Journalist is an oxymoron, no?
They had their annual convention last weekend in New York City according to their website. One speech was on ethics in the newsroom--I wonder if they mentioned Rathergate.
The also gave an award based on Ethics.
Also, if you go to their forum, you will see absolutely NO posts on Rathergate.
http://www.spj.org/messageboard/
SPJ has gone the way of RTNDA and The Poynter Institute. They are all members of one large, liberal family of propagandizers and fear mongers.
There is one side of the journalists war that really seeks what they would call the truth. They do so through liberal stained glasses -- i.e., they don't argue with Dick Gephardt, but they would with Newt Gingrich. Essentially, however, they aren't going to intentionally lie and by no means will they fabricate anything. They'll report about homelessness during a Republican administration but not during a RAT one. But they will also, like Isikoff, go after Bill Clinton if there is a story there. The Post is, for the most part in this category.
This side is in conflict with the other side of so-called journalists today that seek the total destructive of conservatism and Republicans by any means necessary. The NY Times is the ringleader of this category.
Unfortunately, the latter side has taken a very strong hold on the news lately. I think after Bush wins, the press will do something even more breathtakingly stupid than cBS did.
I promise you it will only get better.
On Monday night, I sent the following e-mail to their Executive Director--it still goes without a response:
Mr. Terry Harper
Executive Director
Society of Professional Journalists/Sigma Delta Chi Foundation
Dear Mr. Harper,
I found this site because, as a member of the public, I wanted to know if journalists have a published set of ethics. Google led me to this site.
I have to tell you that I am quite surprised that none of your members have posted to the forum you provide on the Society of Professional Journalist's website ( http://www.spj.org/messageboard/) any discussion of the issues surrounding Dan Rather and the documents that were represented to be created by Killian and allegedly kept in his personal files. Do you have an explanation why none of your members would come to your site to discuss what seems to me to be a major, and perhaps watershed situation, concerning journalistic ethics and a possible breach of these ethics?
Secondly, does your Society have any requirements for your members to attend seminars or training concerning journalistic ethics in order to stay in good standing with your Society? If not, how do you ensure that the ethics you publish "stimulate high standards and ethical behavior in the practice of journalism" which is part of your mission as described here: http://www.spj.org/spj_missions.asp?
I hope that you will take the time to answer these questions and I look forward to your answers. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration.
That is an excellent letter. Please ping me if anyone from SPJ deigns to respond to it. You've probably stumped them with such questioning.
Thank you. I will definitely do that.
P.S. I a little new. How do you ping? Am I pinging now?
Is there a way to find out if Rather is a "card carrying" member of the SPJ?
I have had the SPJ on my mind for a few days now. Take them, and the ASNE plus the Maynard Institute, and all of their devotion to "Diversity", and just where does the 5 W's fit in?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1216418/posts?page=5#5
For a while the Maynard site had a page emphasizing Diversity and Gay headlines. (rolleyes)
They used to know the meaning of ethics but now their primary function is to give out awards.
If only they had spent as much time on a list describing how to be being fair to conservatives.
Hey, somebody could write a really good parody of that based on the list you linked to.
Yes, a reply to a post will "ping" the individual(s) listed in the To: box. I'll send you a FReepmail now as well since I need to ask you something.
He would have to be in order to be given one of their "prestigious" (incestuous is more like it) awards. Our anchors and reporters used to pay their membership dues just to enter a tape in the competition and news directors did so in order to attend the annual convention.
Right up there with Profesisional Used Car Salesmen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.