Comments on: Journalism ethics in an understandable nutshell http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/ A world for online journalists. Come all ye scribes, artists and innovators of the press. Sat, 13 Mar 2010 20:53:01 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Mart Lusi http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-14403 Mart Lusi Mon, 15 Oct 2007 05:25:21 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-14403 How about the nitty-gritty of content/copy - the product that reaches customer? All the talk about peripheral matter isn't anywhere the issue that these elements are: 1.Filtering/selectivity - copy topics; how presented, emphasized. 2. Inserting opinion; mixing opinion with fact. 3. Using anonymous sources. 4. Misleading heads. 5. Not quoting - rewording, changing meaning. How about the nitty-gritty of content/copy – the product that reaches customer?
All the talk about peripheral matter isn’t anywhere the issue that these elements are:
1.Filtering/selectivity – copy topics; how presented, emphasized.
2. Inserting opinion; mixing opinion with fact.
3. Using anonymous sources.
4. Misleading heads.
5. Not quoting – rewording, changing meaning.

]]> By: Michael Chritton http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3807 Michael Chritton Fri, 27 Apr 2007 03:18:59 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3807 As spot-on as is your six-pointed ethical star, I'm still glad to be in my graduate level media ethics class. I do think the media --- at least the print media --- are more concerned about ethics than at any time in many decades. If only the news makers we cover were as ethical as we strive to be. As spot-on as is your six-pointed ethical star, I’m still glad to be in my graduate level media ethics class.

I do think the media — at least the print media — are more concerned about ethics than at any time in many decades.

If only the news makers we cover were as ethical as we strive to be.

]]> By: Danny Sanchez http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3790 Danny Sanchez Thu, 26 Apr 2007 18:24:01 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3790 Ha! Kinda like the Out of Gamut warning. Good one Bryan. We can call it the No Longer Ethical warning. Personally, I'm loathe to use even dodging and burning because of the potential for going too far -- exactly like the O.J. photo situation. I like the integrity of the image suggestion. Ha! Kinda like the Out of Gamut warning. Good one Bryan. We can call it the No Longer Ethical warning.

Personally, I’m loathe to use even dodging and burning because of the potential for going too far — exactly like the O.J. photo situation. I like the integrity of the image suggestion.

]]> By: Bryan Murley http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3788 Bryan Murley Thu, 26 Apr 2007 16:29:14 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3788 Boy, opening up the "alter photos" can of worms is a big one. Perhaps: "Don't alter the integrity of the image." I'm sure NPPA probably has books worth of discussion on this issue in their listserv archives. Adjusting contrast, slight dodging and burning, cropping, etc. are all considered acceptable by most, but removing "real things" are considered not so - at least IMHO. The O.J. photo is another matter, as well: when does a "tweaked" photo become a photo illustration or a graphic? That's trickier. Maybe we could get NPPA to work with Adobe Photoshop to put little "ethical" points on all the filters and adjustments, so we'd all know when we were approaching the danger zone. :-) Boy, opening up the “alter photos” can of worms is a big one. Perhaps: “Don’t alter the integrity of the image.” I’m sure NPPA probably has books worth of discussion on this issue in their listserv archives. Adjusting contrast, slight dodging and burning, cropping, etc. are all considered acceptable by most, but removing “real things” are considered not so – at least IMHO.

The O.J. photo is another matter, as well: when does a “tweaked” photo become a photo illustration or a graphic? That’s trickier. Maybe we could get NPPA to work with Adobe Photoshop to put little “ethical” points on all the filters and adjustments, so we’d all know when we were approaching the danger zone. :-)

]]> By: Danny Sanchez http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3743 Danny Sanchez Thu, 26 Apr 2007 00:49:30 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3743 You know, you're absolutely right on the photo thing. How do you suppose that could be re-worded? "Don't alter photos to produce false effects?" You know, you’re absolutely right on the photo thing. How do you suppose that could be re-worded? “Don’t alter photos to produce false effects?”

]]> By: Mindy McAdams http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3725 Mindy McAdams Wed, 25 Apr 2007 19:25:33 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3725 I think at least one of these -- "Don’t alter photographs" -- can't stand on its own. Because cropping, sharpening, and dodging/burning are all acceptable, but erasing and adding are NOT. Excessive adjustments (your call) can distort the truth (remember the O.J. Simpson photo on the Time and newsweek covers), but it's always okay to adjust the contrast a wee bit, or tweak the levels. I think at least one of these — “Don’t alter photographs” — can’t stand on its own. Because cropping, sharpening, and dodging/burning are all acceptable, but erasing and adding are NOT. Excessive adjustments (your call) can distort the truth (remember the O.J. Simpson photo on the Time and newsweek covers), but it’s always okay to adjust the contrast a wee bit, or tweak the levels.

]]> By: Danny Sanchez http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3715 Danny Sanchez Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:58:28 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3715 Hmmm, I'll have to sic Manning on that. This could easily turn into a "J-School for Dummies" project. Hmmm, I’ll have to sic Manning on that. This could easily turn into a “J-School for Dummies” project.

]]> By: Matt Sokoloff http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/comment-page-1/#comment-3712 Matt Sokoloff Wed, 25 Apr 2007 14:28:26 +0000 http://journalistopia.com/2007/04/25/journalism-ethics-in-an-understandable-nutshell/#comment-3712 Any other classes that students dread sitting through that can be summed up in six bullet points? How about all of J-school in 20? Any other classes that students dread sitting through that can be summed up in six bullet points? How about all of J-school in 20?

]]>