Course Code: BMC52

Media Ethics
2 Credits, College paper

Course Outline
1.Ethics and Moral Reasoning
i. The Study of ethics: an overview
ii. Defining ethics
iii. Moral reasoning and ethical decision making
iv. The context of moral reasoning
v. Ethical theories in moral reasoning
vi. Critical thinking in moral reasoning
vii. A model of moral reasoning
2. Media Ethics and society
i. The study of Media ethics: an overview
ii. Ethics and professional codes of communication
iii. the notion of ethical proto-norms for communicative actions
iv. the challenges of the information age
v. The media as socially responsible institutions
vi. The ethical dilemma: Conflict of values
3. Truth and Honesty in Media Communication
i. Truth as a fundamental value
ii. Media practitioners and the truth-falsehood dichotomy
iii. Truth telling and approaches to moral reasoning
iv. Media and intellectual dishonesty
v. Confidentiality and truth telling
vi. Truth and deception
4. Communication Media and Ethical Issues
i. Freedom of thought and expression: human right issues
ii. Communication towards human dignity
iii. Stereotypes in media communication
iv. The media and privacy: a delicate balance
v. Confidentiality and the public interest
vi. Media and conflict of interest
vii. Economic pressures and social responsibility
viii. The media and antisocial behavior
ix. Media Practitioners and social justice
5. Ethical Issues in Cyberspace
i. Ethics in cyberspace: an overview
ii. Technology and daily life
iii. Technology and virtual world
iv. Identity and deception
v. Morality and cyberspace
vi. Information and manipulation
vii. Online gossiping and cyberbullying
 i. Copyright and plagiarisms
ii. Hatred and crime in cyberspace
iii. Tweeting and terrorism
iv. Sex and pornography in cyberspace
v. Digital divide
6. Principles of Christian Communication Ethics
i. Christian ethical foundations
a. Truth telling
b. Respect
c. Freedom
d. Non-violence
e. Human rights
f. Justice
g. Objectivity
7. Christian ethical Response
i. The value of ethical communication
ii. Promoting Christian media practice
iii. Prophetic communication
iv. Bringing awareness of communication values
v. Solidarity with the weak and vulnerable in society
vi. Bridging the digital gap
vii. Use of alternative media
viii. New patterns for Christian communication
ix. Networking for ethical media practices

Media Ethics
Ethics concerns principles of right and wrong behavior. Ethics in communication applies to
various settings: interpersonal relations, organizational life, mass media, computer mediated
communication etc. The skills are necessary for communicating effectively in this age of
information, Understanding the consequences of decisions, being accountable for actions, and
communicating truthfully, code of ethics, ethical issue3s on the internet, and confidential
communications etc.
➢ Anticipating, analyzing and interpreting public opinions, attitudes and issues that might
impact for good or ill, the operations and plans of the organizations.
➢ Researching, conducting and evaluating on a continuing basis programs of action and
communication to achieve the informed public understanding necessary to success of an
organizations aims.
Ethics is a branch of philosophy is also called as moral philosophy that involves systematizing,
defending and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct.
Ethics seeks to resolve questions of human morality by defining concepts such as good and evil,
right and wrong, virtue and vice, justice and crime. As a field of intellectual inquiry, moral
philosophy also is related to the fields of moral psychology, descriptive ethics and value theory.
Three major areas of study within ethics.
1. Meta ethics – concerning the theoretical meaning and reference of moral proportions, and
how their truth values (if any) can be determined.
2. Normative ethics – concerning the practical means of determining a moral cause of action.
3. Applied ethics – concerning what a person is obligated (or permitted) to do in a specific
situation or a particular domain of action.

The English word ‘ethics’ is derived from the ancient Greek word ‘ethikos’ meaning relating to
one’s “character”, which itself comes from the root word “ethos” meaning “character, moral
nature”. The word ‘ethics in English refers to several things. It can refer to philosophical ethics or
moral philosophy -- a project that attempts to use reason to answer various kinds of ethical
questions. Bernard Williams an English Philosopher writes, attempting to explain moral
philosophy: “what make an inquiry a philosophical one is reflective generality and a style of
argument that claims to be rationally persuasive. He describes the content of this area of inquiry
as addressing the very broad question, “how one should live”.

Rush worth Kidder states that “standard definitions of ethics have typically included such phrases
as “the science of the ‘ideal human character’ or the science of moral duty”.

Richard William Paul and Linda Elder define ethics as “a set of concepts and principles that guide
us in determining what behavior helps or harms sentient creatures”.

The Cambridge dictionary of philosophy states that the word “ethics” is commonly used
interchangeably with morality… and sometimes it is used more narrowly to mean the moral
principles of a particular tradition, group or individual”.

Moral Reasoning and Ethical Decision making

Moral reasoning is a systematic approach to making ethical decisions.

It is structured process, an intellectual means of defending our ethical judgments against the
criticism of others.
Knowledge of ethical principles is important but it’s application and defense of rules of conduct
that are core to moral reasoning – can you provide rational grounds upon which moral decisions
have been made?
Different circumstances/ethical dilemmas require the application of ethical frameworks which
moral agents can use to make ethical judgments.
Moral judgment should be based on sound ethical theories and defensible through reasoned
analysis.
Mahatma Gandhi stressed that people follow ethical principles and listed following seven social
sins:
1. Politics without principles
2. Wealth without work
3. Commerce without morality
4. Knowledge without character
5. Pleasure without conscience
 6. Science without humanity — education stands for the all round development of the
individual and his/her character. True knowledge leads to the development of one’s
character where one evolves his ‘Rational self’. Gandhi held that science without the
thought of the welfare of humanity is a sin. Science and humanity together pave the way
for welfare of all.
7. Worship without sacrifice. In religion, we worship but if we are not ready to sacrifice for
social service, worship has no value: it is sin to worship without sacrifice.
Ethics and Morals

The word ethics derived from the ancient Greek word ‘ethikos’ which means character is the
essence of values and habits of a person or group. It covers the analysis and employment of
concepts such as right and wrong, good evil, and acting with responsibility. It has many definitions.
According to one “ethics are the principles of conduct governing an individual or a group” another
describes ethics as relating to what is good or bad, and having to do with moral duty and
obligation”.
The word moral is defined as relating to principles of right and wrong. The root word for moral
is Latin “mos” meaning custom. So ethics and moral means character and custom. Character and
custom, however, provide two very different standards for defining what is right and what is
wrong. Character is a personal attribute, while custom is defined by a group over time. People
have character society’s have custom. To violate either can be said to be wrong, within its
appropriate frame of reference.

In other way, that the morals are accepted from an authority (culture, religious, etc) while ethics
are accepted because they follow from personally accepted principles, for example stealing –
religion forbids stealing, then stealing would be immoral. An ethical view might be based on an
idea of personal property that should not be taken without social consent (like a court order).

Process of moral decision making

Moral agent must possess knowledge and skills in three areas:
– Context
– Philosophical foundations of moral theory
– Critical thinking
Understanding of these three areas will support moral decision making

Nature of Ethics
Simply stated, ethics refers to standards of behavior that tell us how human beings ought to act in
many situations in which they find themselves as friends, parents, children, citizens, business
people, teachers, professionals and so on. It is helpful to identify what ethics is not. Ethics is not
the same as feelings. Feelings provide important information for our ethical choices. Some people
have highly developed habits that make them feel bad when they do something wrong but many
people feel good even though they are doing something wrong. And often our feelings will tell us
it is uncomfortable to do the right thing if it is hard.
Ethics is not religion. Many people are not religious, but ethics applied to everyone. Most
religions do advocate high ethical standards but sometimes do not address all the types of problems
we face.
Ethics is not following the law. A good system of law does incorporate many ethical standards,
but law can deviate from what is ethical. Law can become ethically corrupt. Law can be made to
be a function of power alone and designed to serve the interests of narrow groups. Law may have
a difficult time designing or enforcing standards in some important areas, and may be slow to
address new problems.
Ethics is not following culturally accepted norms. Some cultures are quite ethical, but others
become corrupt or blind to certain ethical concerns eg: when in Rome do as Romans do”
Ethics is not science. Social and natural science can provide important data to help us make better
ethical choice. But science alone does not tell us what we ought to do. Science may provide an
explanation for what humans are alike. But ethics provides reasons for how humans ought to act.
And just because something is scientifically or technologically possible, it may not be ethical to
do it.

Moral Reasoning
Moral reasoning is a thinking process with the objective of determining whether an idea is right or
wrong. To know whether something is “right” or “wrong” one must first know what the something
is intended to accomplish. Or to know if this action is the right action to take, one must know what
one wants to accomplish, where one is, and the environment between here and the accomplished
state. For example, to impress my boss, I have to know both what is likely to impress him/her,
what I myself can do at my work place or where he/she would observe etc. thus to know if
something (an idea, action, or a behaviour) is “right” one has to know both what one intends to
accomplish and the environment that exist between “here” and “there”. But that alone is not
enough, there is a third consideration: is it good for the people who live around me whether they
will be benefited. Here we think and reasoning.

Lawrence Kohlberg says that there are six stages of moral development. He determined that the
process of moral development was principally concerned with justice and that it continued
throughout the individual’s life.

The six stages of moral development occur in phases of pre-conventional, conventional and post
conventional.
1. Pre-conventional: pre conventional level of moral reasoning is especially common in
children, although adults can also exhibit this level of reasoning. Reasoners at this level
judge the morality of an action by its direct consequences. The pre conventional level
consists of the first and second stages of moral development and is solely concerned with
the self in an egocentric manner. A child with pre-conventional morality has not yet
adopted or internalized society’s conventions regarding what is right or wrong but instead
focuses largely on external consequences that certain actions may bring.
In stage one – (obedience and punishment driven), individuals focus on the direct
consequences of their actions on themselves e.g, an action as perceived as wrong because the
perpetrator (the one who carries the harmful crime) is punished. ----because of the punishment
the child obeys.
Stage two— (self-interest driven) expresses the “what’s in it for me” position, in which right
behavior is defined by whatever the individual believes to be in their best interest but
understood in a narrow way which does not consider one’s reputation or relationships to groups
of people. Stage two reasoning shows a limited interest in the needs of others, but only to a
 point where it might further the individual’s own interests. As a result concern for others is
not based on loyalty or intrinsic respect. (eg: you scratch my back, and I will scratch yours
mentally).

2. Conventional level
The conventional level of moral reasoning is typical of adolescents and adults. To reason in a
conventional way is to judge the morality of actions by comparing them to society’s view and
expectations. Conventional level consists of third and fourth stages of moral development.
Conventional morality is characterized by an acceptance of society’s norms even when there
are no consequences for obedience of disobedience.

In stage three (good intentions as determined by social consensus) the self enters society by
conforming to social standards. Individuals are receptive to approval or disapproval from
others as it reflects society’s view. They try to be a ‘good girl’ or ‘good boy’ to live up to these
expectations, having learned that being regarded as good benefits the self. Stage three
reasoning may judge the morality of an action by evaluating its consequences in terms of
person’s relationships, which includes respect, gratitude and rules.

In stage four (authority and social order obedience driven) it is important to obey laws, dictums
and social conventions, because of their importance in maintaining a functioning society. A
central ideal or ideals often prescribe what is right and wrong. If one person violates law,
perhaps everyone would – thus there is n obligation and a duty to uphold laws and rules.
(morality still dictated by an outside force)

Post conventional level

This level is also known as principled level, is marked by a growing realization that individuals
are separate entities from society. Individuals own perspective may take precedence over
society’s view; individuals may disobey rules with their own principles. Post conventionalists
moralists live by their own ethical principles—such as life, liberty and justice.
In stage five (social contract driven)- the world is viewed as holding different opinions, rights
and values. Laws are regarded as social contracts rather than rigid edicts.
In stage six (universal- ethical- principal orientation) moral reasoning is based on abstract
reasoning using universal ethical principles (rather than concrete) and focus on ideas such as
equality, dignity or respect.

Five Sources of Ethical Standards (Theories)

1. The Utilitarian approach

Some ethicist emphasize that the ethical action is the one that provides the most good or does the
least harm. The ethical corporate action, then, is the one that produces the greatest good and does
the least harm for all who are affected. The utilitarian approach deals with consequences; it tries
both to increase the good done and to reduce the harm done.

2. The Right Approach

It is also called the deontological approach. Other philosophers and ethicists suggest that the
ethical action is the one that best protects and respects the moral rights of those affected. This
approach starts from the belief that humans have a dignity based on their human nature per se or
on their ability to choose freely what they do with their lives. On the basis of such dignity, they
have a right to be treated as ends and not merely as means to other ends. The list of moral rights—
including the right to make one’s own choices about what kind of life to lead, to be told the truth,
not to be injured, to a degree of privacy and so on—is widely debated.it is often said that rights
imply duties in particular, the duty to respect others right.
3. The Fairness or Justice Approach
Aristotle and other Greek philosophers have contributed the idea that all equals should be treated
equally. Today we use this idea to say that ethical actions treat all human beings equally—or if
unequally, then fairly based on some standard that is defensible. We pay people more based on
their harder work or the greater amount that they contribute to an organization, and say that is fair.
4. The Common good Approach
The Greek philosophers have also contributed the notion that life in community is a good in itself
and our actions should contribute to the life. This approach suggests that the interlocking
relationships of society are the basis of ethical reasoning and that respect and compassion for all
others especially the vulnerable—are requirements of such reasoning. This approach also calls
attention to the common conditions that are important to the welfare of everyone. This may be a
system of laws, effective police and fire departments, healthcare, a public educational system or
even public recreational areas.

5. The Virtue Approach

A very ancient approach to ethics is that ethical actions ought to be consistent with certain ideal
virtues that provide for the full development of our humanity. These virtues are disposition and
habits that enable us to act according to the highest potential of our character and on behalf of
values like truth and beauty. Honesty, courage, compassion, generosity, tolerance, love, fidelity
integrity (veracity, genuineness), fairness self-control, and prudence are the examples of virtues.

2. Media Ethics and society

a. The study of Media ethics: an overview

Ethics involves what is right, impartial, fair, just and responsible. Ethical practice is as important
in media as it is in any other walk of life. Ethics based journalism with objectivity, accountability,
fairness and truth as the key elements and are vital for responsible media practice.

(Ethics: meaning and Concept)

The concept of ethics is very subjective and relative; therefore, it would be relevant to look at the
theories which can be considered to determine correct media behavior. Basically, three efficient
theories that are consistent employed to determine media behavior are:
1. Consequentialism
2. Utilitarianism
3. Deontology
Consequentialism:
The theory suggests that the ethical value of an action should be determined on its consequences.
Consequentiality theories concentrate only on the outcome of an action without considering about
the means, i.e. how the consequences came about. Hence, all actions should be considered as of
their possible outcomes before being executed. The consequences of an action can be judged from
two perspectives: Ethical Egoism and Ethical Altruism.
Ethical Egoism does not reflect a cohesive social model as such actions can harm others while
Ethical Altruism holds those actions that benefit others and can be considered good.

Utilitarianism:
Utilitarianism theory is applicable to the media as it considers the betterment of the society at large.
It considers ethical as that which is designed to create the greatest good for the maximum numbers.
The utilitarian approach encourages responsible and thoughtful behavior. Although it is possible
to make mistake in judgement, it is advisable to invest time in considering all the possible
outcomes of a certain action, to determine whether the overall good is greater than the negative
consequences.

Deontology:
Deontology concentrates on a person’s duty as a means to determine appropriate action. Kant is
believed to be the most famous follower of this theory. He was of the opinion that it was the
pretention behind an action that rendered it ethical or unethical. Kant felt that there was only one
virtue which was good without qualification: GOODWILL. Actions inspired by goodwill are done
out of respect for moral law and duty. Kant’s categorical perspective – will to act well out of duty
– has three important guidelines:
• An agent should be motivated by the principle, which he would be happy to see as a
universal maxim.
• Always treat people as an end in themselves and not just a means.
• Acts as if you were the law maker in the kingdom of ‘End’.
It is expected from a journalist that he does his job honestly and objectively along with the
protection of the sources and loyalty with the employer. These factors create dilemma at times.
Hence it is important to understand all aspects of ethical issues.

“Facts are sacred, comments, are free. Facts must not be tempered with; news must be reported
with complete objectivity, without any distortion. A journalist should not mix news with views
and must be careful enough to clearly distinguish between the two”.

Objective process of social-economic and media development, intensifying competition within the
press and from the other new media and other kinds of economic and political pressures have
introduced serious problems. Higher level of manipulations of news, analysis and public affairs
information to suit the owners financial and political interests; prejudice and propaganda
masquerading as professional journalism; the down warding and devaluing of editorial functions
in some cases; creeping corruption are deeply worrying tendencies.

It should be noticed that ethic in the profession are only guideline, which are necessary—in the
process of information dissemination. These ethics relate to language use, and means adopted in
securing information for ensuring objectivity and fairness in presenting facts to the public.
Collection and dissemination of information is the duty of the press. Because, the press as a mass
communication channel operates in a public sphere for the benefit of the readers, the actions of the
press are expected to be above ground. The public scrutinizes the action of the press on all
occasions and expects the press to reflect values and ethics of the profession. In the process of
collection and dissemination of information, the press adopts different means to obtain information
and occasionally suppresses news from the public because of the extraneous reasons. The press
is, therefore expected to have certain norms and ethics in the collection and dissemination. Former
Press council of India chairman P.B. Sawant noted that the code of ethics all over the world
emphasizes the following:
(a)honesty and fairness, (b) reply to critical opinion, (c) objectivity in reporting, (d) prohibition to
receive gifts, (e) respect for privacy (f)distinction between fact and opinion, (g) not inflame hatred,
(h) not use dishonest means to obtain information, and (i) general standards of decency and taste.
There are number of principles (more than 51) followed by the journalists in different countries of
the world, among them ten principles were found to be common. These ten principles are:
truthfulness, honesty, accuracy, of information, correction or errors, prohibition of discrimination
on the basis of race/ethnicity, religion etc., respect for privacy, prohibition to accept bribes or any
benefits, fair means in information collection, prohibition to allow any outsider to have influence
on the journalistic work, prohibition of discrimination on the basis of sex/class etc., freedom of
speech, expression, comment, criticism, professional secrecy. (…)

Areas of Media Ethics

Media ethics: issues of moral principles and values as applied to the conduct, roles, and content of
the mass media, in particular journalism ethics and standards and marketing ethics; also, the field
of study concerned with this topic. In relation to news coverage it includes issues such as
impartiality, objectivity, balance, bias, privacy and public interest. More generally, it includes
stereotyping, taste and decency, obscenity, freedom of speech, advertising practices such as
product placement, and legal issues such as defamation. On an institutional level it includes
debates over media ownership and control, commercialization, accountability, the relation of the
media to the political system, issues arising from regulation (e.g. censorship) and deregulation.

Ethics of Journalism
The ethics of journalism is one of the most well-defined branches of media ethics. Topics covered
by journalism ethics include:
News manipulation: news can manipulate and be manipulated. Governments and corporations
may attempt to manipulate news media, governments by censorship and corporations by share
ownership. The methods of manipulation are subtle and many. Manipulation may be voluntary
or involuntary. Those being manipulated may not be aware of this.
Truth: truth may conflict with many other values, public interest. Revelation of military secrets
and other sensitive government information may be contrary to the public interest, even if it is true.
However, public interest is not a term which is easy to define.
Privacy—salacious details of the lives of public figures is a central content element in many media.
Publication is not necessarily justified simply because the information is true. Privacy is also a
right, and one which conflicts with free speech.
Fantsy – fantasy is an element of entertainment, which is a legitimate goal of media content.
Journalism may mix fantasy and truth, with resulting ethical dilemmas.

Taste: photojournalists who cover war and disasters confront situations which may shock the
sensitivities of their audiences. For example, human remains are rarely screened. The ethical issue
is how far should one risk shocking an audience’s sensitivities in order to correctly and fully report
the truth.

Conflict with the law: journalistic ethics may conflict with the law over issues such as the
protection of confidential news sources. There is also the question of the extent to which it is
ethically acceptable to break the law in order to obtain news. For example, undercover reporters
may be engaging in deception, trespass and similar torts and crimes.

Ethics of entertainment media

Issues in the ethics of entertainment media include:

• The depiction of violence and sex, and the presence of strong language. Ethical guidelines
and legislation in this area are common and many media e.g, films, computer games are
subject to ratings systems and supervision by agencies.
• Fluff or celebrity news: over the years, print media has been dying out so journalists began
to report on what is referred to as “Celebrity News”, or “Fluff”. As more outlets adopt this
topic to report on, people become dependent on them. According to Alden weight, most
people know not to completely trust these outlets due to ethical discrepancies, but the issue
arises when people who are not as mature or educated find these reports to be completely
true.
• Product placement: an increasingly common marketing tactic is the placement of products
in entertainment media. The producers of such media may be paid high sums to display
branded products. The practice is controversial and largely unregulated.
• Advertising. Attraction and persuasion are currently found in modern journalism. It is
found that these methods of advertising may alter an audience’s point of view of what is
realistic and falsified information.
• Stereotypes: both advertising and entertainment media make heavy use of stereotypes.
Stereotypes may negatively affect people’s perceptions of themselves or promote socially
undesirable behaviour. The stereotypical portrayals of men, affluence and ethnic groups
are examples of major areas of debate.
Women in media: entertainment media often exploits female bodies by objectifying
and de-humanizing them. By doing so, the concept of female bodies being bought and sold
becomes common.
 Media outlets usually use either images or imagery of female bodies to counter negative
news that is provided throughout the day.

Media and Democracy

In democratic countries, a special relationship exists between media and government. Although
the freedom of the media may be constitutionally enshrined and have precise legal definition and
enforcement, the exercise of that freedom by individual journalists is a matter of personal choice
and ethics. Modern democratic government subsists in representation of millions by hundreds.
For the representatives to be accountable, and for the process of government to be transparent,
effective communication paths must exist to their constituents. Today these paths consist primarily
of the mass media, to the extent that if press freedom disappeared, so would most political
accountability. In this area, media ethics merges with issues of civil rights and politics. Issues
include’: subversion of media independence by financial interests and Government monitoring of
media for intelligence gathering its own people.

Media integrity

2.Media Ethics and Society

Every day there are ethical decisions that impact thousands of people who watch, or listen or read
and/ or click on a media.
According to Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel (the Elements of Journalism) the significant part
of reestablishing trust and confidence in journalism is a recapturing the original meaning of
objectivity as transparently conveyed methods as opposed to the concept of personal non-bias.
They point out that journalism today is subjected to more reflection and scruting than ever before.
As our country/world negotiates a pandemic and widespread social unrest, the need for accurate
news reporting becomes urgent”. They further point out that the govt can now supplant as well as
censor information, in effect offering a competing view of reality. (high-tech disinformation and
deepfakes). Moreover, the journalists have an obligation to exercise personal conscience and not
to neglect the moral dimensions of their profession. A culture of honesty must be nurtured in the
news room and intellectual diversity must be valued.

In journalism how many voices? Are too many?

Today media system is run by many differing opinions and voices. When new articles are
comprised of facts and opinions, it can leave the public with
Digital Media ethics

Digital media ethics deals with the distinct ethical problems, practices and norms of digital news
media. Digital news media includes online journalism, blogging, digital photo journalism, citizen
journalism and social media. It includes questions about how professional journalism should use
this ‘new media’ to research and publish stories, as well as how to use text or images provided by
citizens.
A Revolution in Ethics
A Media revolution is transforming, fundamentally and irrevocably, the nature of journalism that
are interactive and immediate.

Our media ecology is a chaotic landscape evolving at a furious pace. Professional journalists share
the journalistic sphere with tweeters, bloggers, citizen journalists, and social media users.

Amid every revolution, new possibilities emerge while old practices are threatened. Today is no
exception. The economics of professional journalism struggles as audiences migrate online.
Shrinkage of newsrooms creates concern for the future of journalism. Yet these fears also prompt
experiments in journalism, such as non- centers of investigative journalism.

A central question is to what extent existing media ethics is suitable for today’s and tomorrow’s
news media that is immediate, interactive and “always-on” – a journalism of amateurs and
professionals. Most of the principles were developed over the past century, originating in the
construction of professional, objective ethics for mass commercial newspapers in the late 19 th
century.
We are moving towards a mixed news media—a news media citizen and professional journalism
across many media platforms. This new mixed news media requires a new mixed media ethics –
guidelines that apply to amateur and professional whether they blog, tweet, broadcast or write for
newspapers. Media ethics needs to be rethought and reinvented for the media for today, not of
yesteryears.

Tensions on two levels

The changes challenge the foundations of media ethics. The challenge runs deeper than debates
about one or another principle, such as objectivity. The challenge is greater than specific problems,
such as how newsrooms can verify content from citizens. The revolution requires us to rethink
assumptions. What can ethics mean for a profession that must provide instant news and analysis:
where everyone with a modem is a publisher?

The media revolution has created ethical tensions on two levels.

On the first level, there is a tension between traditional journalism and online journalism. The
culture of traditional journalism, with its values of accuracy, pre-publication verification, balance,
impartiality, and gate-keeping, rubs up against the culture of online journalism which emphasizes
immediacy, transparency, partiality, non-professional journalists and post-publication correction.
On the second level, there is a tension between parochial and global journalism. If journalism has
global impact, what are its global responsibilities? Should media ethics reformulate its aims and
norms so as to guide a journalism that is now global in reach and impact? What would that look
like?

The challenge for today’s media ethics can be summarized by the question: whither ethics in a
world of multi-media, global journalism? Media ethics must do more than point out these tensions.
Theoretically, it must untangle the conflicts between values. It must decide which principles should
be preserved or invented. Practically, it should provide new standards to guide online or offline
journalism.

Layered journalism

What would an integrated ethics look like?

It will be the ethics of the integrated newsroom, a newsroom that practices layered journalism.
Layered journalism brings together different forms of journalism and different types of journalism
to produce a multimedia offering a professional-styled news and analysis combined with citizen
journalism and interactive chat.

The newsroom will be layered vertically and horizontally

Vertically, there will be many layers of editorial positions. There will be citizen journalists and
bloggers in the news room, or closely associated with the newsroom. Many contributors will
work from countries around the world. Some will write for free, some will be equivalent to paid
freelancers, others will be regular commentators.

In addition, there will be different types of editors. Some editors will work with these new
journalists, while other editors will deal with unsolicited images and texts sent by citizens via
email, web sites, and twitter. There will be editors or “community producers” charged with going
out to neighborhoods to help citizens use media to produce their own stories.

Horizontally, the future newsroom will be layered in terms of the kinds of journalism it produces,
from print and broadcast sections to online production centers.

Newsrooms in the past have had vertical and horizontal layers. Newspaper newsrooms have
ranged vertically from the editor in -chief at the top to the cub reporter on the bottom. Horizontally,
large mainstream newsrooms have produced several types of journalism, both print and broadcast.
However, future newsrooms will have additional and different layers.

Layered journalism will confront two types of problems. First, there will be ‘vertical’ ethical
questions about how the different layers of the newsroom, from professional editors to citizen
freelancers, should interact to produce responsible journalism. For example, by what standard will
professional editors evaluate the contributions of citizen journalists? Second, there will be
‘horizontal’ questions about the norms for the various newsroom sections – who is a journalist?
(the ‘democratization’ of media – technology that allows citizens to engage in journalism and
publication of many kinds – blurs the identity of the journalists and the idea of what constitutes
journalism.
In the previous century, journalists were a clearly defined group. For the most part, they were
professionals who wrote for major mainstream newspapers and broadcasters. The public had no
great difficulty in identifying members of the ‘press’.

Today, citizens without journalistic training and who do not work for mainstream media calls
themselves journalists, or write in ways that fall under the general description of a journalists as
someone who regularly writes on public issues for a public or audience. – is a person expressing
their opinions on their Facebook site a journalist?

Value of ethical communication

Ethical communication is a type of communication that is predicated upon certain business values,
such as being truthful, concise and responsible with one’s words and the resulting actions .as a set
of principles, ethical communication understands that one’s thought must be conveyed and
expressed effectively and concisely, and that the resulting actions or consequences will
(potentially) be based solely on how the message was communicated. Thus, ethical
communication defines a framework or set of acceptable communication principles that align with
an enterprise’s overarching code of conduct or code of ethics.

Fundamentals of Ethical Communication

Perhaps the main principle of ethical communication is honesty, as other factors stem from this
core value of presenting information in the most reliable and factual way possible. Any attempt
to mislead or present confusing information is not ethical communication. Additionally, the
‘honesty’ principle of ethical communication is linked inexorably to other core principles—
consistency and responsibility. This entails that information presented to different parties be
consistent, and that short term and long-term consequences of honest communication are to be
accepted as one’s responsibility.
Ethical communication also assumes that communicated information is always presented
according to one’s subjective perception, even if only in the most minimal way, and thus the goal
of ethical communication with others and to ensure that every recipient receive the same message.
Openness and Transparency
Truthfulness and honesty is the most core principle of ethical communication. This means that
speaking 99 percent of the truth in a matter – while leaving out one percent of the facts – is not
ethical communication, as omitting any detail (intentionally)changes the way that a listener will
perceive an event. Thus being 100 percent open and transparent, and hiding nothing, is in in order
for all business relationships –whether within a business between its members, or with business
and their partners, or even costumers—to succeed in the short term and long term.

Being honest is linked to one’s personal and professional trustworthiness and integrity, in a perfect
world, all members of an organization would have a positive reputation of honesty, such that
listeners never doubt that what they are saying is 100 percent true. Within an organization – and
between businesses- this type of honest communication can be the difference between a project
being completed successfully or not. For instance, utilizing ethical communication, to be honest
about the time and / or budget constraints during a board meeting with primary stakeholders can
be the difference between the project meeting its goals, or falling due to misunderstanding and/or
miscommunication. Thus one of the primary goals of ethical communication is to prevent any
misunderstandings or instances of miscommunication.

Consideration for Any Potential Roadblocks.

When communicating with another party, truly ethical communication entails considering any
potential factor that may influence how the recipient understands – or reveives—the information
that is being communicated. Of there are any known roadblocks, then ethical communication
principles dictate that the speaker/communicator utilize whtatever means possible to mitigate or
attenuate the roadblocks and ensure that the recipients of the information are able to fully
understand what is being communicated. Several exapmles are there where roadblocks may
present themselves, resulting in the communicator needing to take steps to attenuate any potential
instances of miscommunication.

Language use: obviously, ethical communication dictates that speakers utilize the language that
listeners understand. It would make little sense to present a business presentation in English to a
non- English speaking audience. It would also be unethical to communicate the information
mostly in other language.

Jargon: Every industry has its own jargon, when speaking to a layperson, it is ethical to speak with
simple, easy-to- understand words, while avoiding the use of heavy jargon, resulting in portions
of the presentation/communication being incomprehensible to a portion of the audience.

Language Fluency: ethical communication takes into account the level of fluency as well as the
language spoken by listeners so that recipients of the communication (whether it be spoken or
written) are able to fully understand what is being communicated.

Accessibility to Technology: in this information and digital age, some take accessibility to
advanced technology for granted. For instance, while smartphones are readily available, and
translation apps are abundant, not everyone is able to access such applications or platforms. If a
business wanted to present certain pieces of information to an audience while expecting the
audience to translate it into their native language via an application, there may by confusion. Thus,
the ability to access certain technology – and the know-how on how to use certain applications
may be a roadblock when it comes to ethically communicating to a particular audience.

Development of Relationship
The art of communication allows people to express themselves in order to develop relationships.
In business, this can be an employee dealing with a manager, executives communicating with
stakeholders, or managers talking with other business representatives. it is critical for there to be
no confusion or misunderstandings when businesses try to develop relationships within themselves
and with other business entities or clients/customers. To accomplish this, ethical communication
principles must be followed, ensuring that all parties can receive the consistent truth, and
understand what needs to be done and how it needs to be done.

Principles of Ethical Communication

There is a myriad or core principles associated with ethical communication, starting with the core
value of honesty that all other values are connected to. However, it can be said that there is a value
underlying honesty and that is emotional intelligence/ empathy as the precursor of all soft skills,
which allows all personal to be understood and to effectively communicate with others. Emotional
intelligence, within the framework of ethical communication, allows one to understand the needs
of others, and meet those needs in the most efficient manner possible as if you were in their shoes.
1. Be truthful and Honest
Being honest means communicating what is known to be true (only 100 percent the facts) to a
listener, with no intent to deceive or present only parts of the truth. It also means being as objective
as possible, that is, not tailoring the story based on what the speaker wants the listener to believe.
Letting the listener take the data that is objectively presented and believe what they choose to
believe is a core goal of ethical communication. Ethical communication should be based on
accurate information and facts – in a word, do not lie.
2. Active Listening
Hearing someone and listening to them are two different things. In order for ethical
communication to be effective. It is necessary for the recipient to pro-actively listen to the speaker,
and to not just hear what they want to hear, or to hear only parts of the conversation. This also
means asking questions when any point is not completely understood, for the sake of clarification.
3. Speak Non-judgmentally
Ethical and concisely communicating means speaking in a non-judgmental manner with every
recipient, negating unnecessary conflict, which typically creates a breakdown in communication
and causes misunderstandings. Unnecessary conflict is never good for any business and such
conflicts is never good for any business, and such conflicts usually result from unethical
communications, with judgmental, accusatory, and overly-critical comments often being the
catalyst for such breakdowns in communication.
4. Speak from Your Own Experience
Bringing your personal experience into a dialogue with business listeners is important, providing
backup for your arguments with something more tangible. Such a communication
method(experimental communication) paints a complete picture for your audience and helps to
prove your points so that the listeners have a better understanding of what is being said.

5. Consider the Receiver’s preferred Communication Channel

You risk losing an audience if you use a communication channel that is not preferred by your
intended receiver. To effectively communicate with your listeners, use the most preferred
communication channel, whether that be face-to-face, email, conference call, phone call,
messenger app, etd. Also, when presenting data to a business audience, be aware of the preferred
method of presentation for that business, whether it be graphs, slides, power point presentations,
etc. additionally, since body language is very important, it is often preferred to meet business
clients face- to- face.
6. Strive to Understand
While it is important to be proactive in listening, it is important for listeners to also strive to fully
understand what is being said before responding. While asking for clarification or confirmation
of a point is fine, many times questions that listeners should think about what has been said before
constructing a reply. Reading “in between the lines” is also an important skill that allows for
understanding what isn’t said, but was implicitly said or implied.
7. Avoid a Negative tone
Ethically communicating assumes the speaker will avoid rudeness, be polite and professional, and
have tact. The ethical communicator knows that it’s not only important what you say, but how
you say it. Tone is one of the most critical facets of communication. A listener may miss the
meaning altogether if the tone is wrong., which can lead to unnecessary confrontations that
decrease business productivity.

Controlling one’s tone goes along with self- control, a soft skill that allows one to know how they
wish to reply to a terse message versus the most effective manner for replying . essentially,
keeping the tone positive or neutral is best, as the tone of a written message -or of one’s voice –
always picked up by the receiver, and can alter how the message is received and /or understood.

Additionally, while it is acceptable to be honest and open, tact -and professional maturity- means
knowing when it is crucial to. Tact also means knowing that being completely honest does not
equate with being rude or negative – it is possible to be completely honest and open with one’s
thoughts and feelings while still remaining polite and respectful.

8. Do not interrupt Others

Allowing others to speak is important for the creation of a civil, effective working environment.
Interrupting others results in misunderstandings and unnecessary conflicts and a breakdown in
workplace communications, which only hinders corporate progress and creates problems.
Interrupting others not only shows a lack of respect, but does not allow the listener to fully grasp
what is being said, which often results in incorrect assumptions being made.
9. Respect Privacy and Confidentiality
10. Accept Responsibility
A core tenant within any ethical communication framework is taking responsibility for the actions
that result from one’s words, whether it be good or bad. This includes both short term and long-
term consequences of one’s communications. Owning one’s words reinforces the importance of
being conscientious about ethical communication.

Christian Ethical Response

Bringing awareness of Communitarian values

The notion that human beings can flourish only within the context of a community has been labeled
“communitarianism. Families, neighborhood, nations, as well as churches, are referred to as
communities. political philosophers write about moral and political communities; there is also talk
about the scientific community. These are different forms of social entities and one might doubt
whether there is much they have in common.
Despite the differences, communities may usefully be characterized by the following three
features. 1. Members of a community are united by shared goals and values, where these are not
just their coinciding individual interests. Members of the same church, we do not merely
congregate because we happen to have the same private interest in worship and have found a
convenient arrangement to share the costs. 2. Members of a community value their relationships
for their own sake, not just for their instrumental value in pursuing their own ends. If a football
team is a community, members enjoy playing football together even if they lose and each of them
would be more likely to win by joining the opposite team. 3. Members of a community consider
their membership as part of their identity. When asked who they are, most people will mention
their nation or at least the place they are from.

The three characteristic features – shared goals, relationships that are not merely instrumental, and
a sense of identity -- are all a matter of degree.
Communities differ in what their members consider to be communal concerns.