¶ … Eason Jordan made what he defined as a "life and death" decision to withhold information that might get his informants killed in Iraq. "It's very simple," he said. "Do you report things that get people killed? The answer is no.," (cited by Rutenberg, 2003). Jordan's decision is a little bit surprising, considering the media's generally ruthless approach to journalism: such as the push to get the story first, or to glean information before competitors in the industry. Journalism is cutthroat enough on an individual level: leading reporters on the ground and editorial boards to make decisions that are in the best interest of the company, but which are not necessarily ethical.
In the case with Eason Jordan, however, it seems that the editorial choice might have been the ethical one. Although "several journalism professors and commentators said Mr. Jordan had compromised CNN's journalistic mission so the cable network could continue to report from Iraq," Jordan's explanation seems equally as plausible (Rutenberg, 2003). Jordan claims that the decision was not made to enable CNN to continue reporting, which is probably would have done anyway. There is no reason to believe that Jordan's decision was made only so that CNN would be able to stay in the war-torn region. The decision to protect the Iraqi sources was based on the reality that Hussein's government was indeed using torture as a primary terrorist tactic to intimidate anyone it viewed as an enemy of the state. There is also no obligation on the part of an editor to print every bit of information it receives.
News media organizations do need to make administrative decisions like that made by Jordan, either to protect the self-interests of the organization or to protect their ethical objectives. If one of these issues weighs more than the other, then the editorial board may end up experiencing the level of criticism that CNN did during the Jordan incident. There are no hard...
This provision allowed voter registrars reject the applications where voters did not check the box or checked it mistakenly. 40,000 out of 70,000 rejected applications were results of Bohac's HB1268 provision. The corruption certainly goes beyond these problems. According to a report by Texas Observer, numerous Texas officials elected to public positions use campaign money in violation of campaign regulations and advocate the interests of various interest groups in exchange
Right to Die For the last few decades, the issue of a person's right to choose the time and method of his or her own death has been one of passionate debate in the United States, with emotions running high on both sides of the controversy as the meanings of liberty and freedom of choice, the morality of taking one's own life, the ethics of people involved in such actions, and
In addition it was agreed that issues of federal budget, revenue and taxation would originate with the House of Representatives. The Great Compromise issued in a spirit of success to the convention and essentially ended the division between the small and large states. However, it did nothing to alleviate the pending debate between the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist. Decisions on how much power to give to the people and to
Mill and U.S. Constitution None of the issues being raised today by the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement are new, but rather they date back to the very beginning of the United States. At the time the Constitution was written in 1787, human rights and civil liberties were far more constrained than they are in the 21st Century. Only white men with property had voting rights for example, while most states
victims and defendants rights extended by the Criminal Justice System. Followed by introduction is the comparison of both sides detailing the rights of victims and defendants by the Criminal Justice System. Conclusion given at the end shows that the Criminal Justice System has more rights to the defendants; however, rights for victims are also increasing in several states. It has been during the last two decades that the rights of
Cultural relativism contends that no one culture possesses a more correct value system than any other. "There is no one standard set of morals," Sullivan (2006) argues, which one can use as a base to: "objectively judge all cultures, so comparing morality between cultures -- which retain independent and distinct histories and influences -- is basically futile" (¶ 9). As the movement is rooted in the world community's response to
Our semester plans gives you unlimited, unrestricted access to our entire library of resources —writing tools, guides, example essays, tutorials, class notes, and more.
Get Started Now