Media Ethics Discussion #4 -- COM101 Mass Communications

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 18:15:03 12/14/08 Sun
Author: Joe Perazella
Subject: Media Ethics Discussion #4

When stands before the court accused of a crime, it is stated that they are innocent until proven guilty. However, we all know that the majority of the public views it in the exact opposite manner; guilty until proven innocent. I feel that in the case of the Standard Times this should have had some sort of influence on which pictures were printed and which ones weren't. The fact that these people were accused of the crimes they stood in court for did not necessarily mean that they are guilty of the crimes.

The paper should have taken a closer look at what they were printing before actually letting the pictures go to the press. By printing information that could in fact be false is very unethical. The Standard Times could be creating very bad reputations for these people and ultimately ruining their lives even if the people accused are innocent. Their employers, co-workers, friends, and parents of their children could be viewing these people as someone they aren't and could result in loss of job, friends, and could be left alone.

Personally, I feel that the paper should have screened the images being printed and only printed the images of the people who were guilty. This can provide a safer environment for parents and their children, could help the police by letting them know who to keep tabs on, and might in the end help to lower the amount of drugs being trafficked and used in the community.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]