The Story And An Apology Essay Example
The Story And An Apology Essay Example

The Story And An Apology Essay Example

Available Only on StudyHippo
Topics:
  • Pages: 12 (3217 words)
  • Published: May 9, 2022
View Entire Sample
Text preview

Media ethics is concerned with the issues of value systems and moral principles as they are applied to the tasks, conduct and also in the content of the mass media; journalistic ethics and also advertising ethics in particular. For instance, when talking about news coverage, media ethics includes various issues such as objectivity, impartiality, balance, privacy, bias, and also the public interest. More generally media ethics could as well include stereotyping, freedom of speech, taste, and decency, obscenity, advertising practices among others Oxford dictionary. In the past several years, cases of the lapse in media ethics have been witnessed across the globe.

In this case, we are considering the rolling stone publication of botched raped story which had been a subject of nationwide discussion. In this case, Rolling Stone printed a repo

...

rt which later emerged to be very explosive. He talks of a lady who had appealed that she was a victim of rape while at a group party held at the University of Virginia. The event led to the transition to set off a firestorm, which saw the occurrence of sexual assault on campuses to the very forefront Mataconis, 2015. The study by Rolling Stone calls upon women to come forth with their stories of having been sexually assaulted which saw the really assaulted. This medium made the University of Virginia respond by suspending the fraternity which was in question and also all the other suspects from the activities pending the investigation about the incidence that had occurred.

Hastily, though, the narration given by Jackie, the woman who reportedly made the accusations, had begun to fall apart and become baseless. There was a vehement denial b

View entire sample
Join StudyHippo to see entire essay

the investigatory body involved that the assault that Jackie related to had ever taken place. The reporting which was undertaken following the investigation by other reporters did not uncover facts that seemed to be indicating that most of the details which were outlined in the previous story could probably not have occurred the same way Jackie and Sabrina Rubin Erdely as the reporter behind the story, related those Mataconis, 2015. In December, there emerged a post, The Washington Post.

It was based on a detailed investigation that revealed that the assault described in the story never took place and that even the friends to Jackie, as said in the original report had doubts what their friend had been telling them for quite some time by then. In a period of less than a month, the story by Rolling Stone had been thoroughly discredited, and many observers were left wondering how such a fundamental breach of journalistic good practices and ethics could have occurred in the first place Mataconis, 2015. Given that media economics ethics, the angle from which we are tackling this particular case is behind what Rolling Stone had to pull back the article which had elicited nationwide debate. Rolling Stone magazine withdrew its article on vicious gang rape at the University of Virginia fraternity after the issue of a report came to the conclusion that the widely disgraced piece saw the catastrophes at every step of the process. The report, printed by the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism and ordered by Rolling Stone, said the publication did not engage in basic, even schedule the journalists' practice to justify details of the ordeal that the

magazines source, only described as Jackie, expressed the articles author, Sabrina Rubin Erdely. During the same day when Ms.

Erdely, in her first widespread comments on the article since it was endorsed into doubt, making an apology to Rolling Stone's readers, her associates and any victims of sexual assault that may be in fearful as a result of her article (Mataconis, 2015). The reporting by rolling stone, resulted in the onset of discussion about the issue of campus rape in the American media during that very time. Soon after, there came post by Washington Post as well as other media outlets about the issue. Also, there were numerous reports of campus sexual assault that had been mishandled by various universities due to the coverage of this incidence.

At Columbia, an aggrieved student went ahead and dragged a mattress all around the campus aiming to call attention to her account of assault and injustice she went through. Although the facts concerning these cases were sometimes disputed, they, however, had fueled a wave of campus activism. This medium made Dana say that her initial idea was only to check at one of the cases in existence by then and sensitize the story to be more about the process as well as the aftermath of what happens when an assault is reported and the sort of issues it raises. However, despite the media discussion about journalists haste to believe rape victims accounts, there exists adequate evidence that most survivors are not typically treated with support when they try their best to speak up about sexual violence. It is funny how the public remains far more skeptical of rape more than

other crimes, and victims are often convinced that they must have done something like drink too much alcohol or dress too revealingly to provoke the assault against them. A staggeringly most of the rape victims are not comfortable reporting their crimes through official channels in media with the fear that they don't think they can get trust from the people.

Relevant opinion polling, for instance, at the University of Miami, a law professor and Cyber Civil Rights Initiative Vice President Mary Anne Franks discussed the issue said in light of the debunked media accounts about campus rape. They agreed to agree that the issue should not have been talking about rape but should have been how to talk about it in a more responsible way instead. During the interviewed and the time of discussion, the findings by Columbia University, Jann S. Wenner, who was the publisher of Rolling Stone, recognized that the piece had some errors. Again, he said that it only signified that isolation and also an unfamiliar episode.

He also stated that Ms. Erdely would considerably continue to write for the magazine. He went further to say that the difficulties only had started with its source. It is seen that Rolling Stone also described Erdely as a good expert fabulist storyteller who worked hard and succeeded to influence the magazines journalism process. He was requested to verify and said that he was not trying to differ from Jackie, but apparently, there is something here that is misleading, and something was believed to have been seated at her doorstep.

The police in Charlottesville, after conducting their investigation, said that the month that they were done with all

research principals. Therefore, it was established that no functional basis to support the articles representation of the attack was exposed. This probably was because she did not work together with the police and failed to be questioned for the Columbia report. She also declined, through her lawyer, Palma Pustilnik, to be interviewed for this article.

She no longer was together with some of the supporters who first brought her to the consideration of Rolling Stone, said Emily Renda, a rape toughie working on sexual assault matters at the University of Virginia. Actions were taken by universities in the US to address the issue: After a four-month investigation, Columbia concluded that the fault was with reporter Sabrina Rubin Erdley and Rolling Stones editors and fact-checkers, who did to stop publication when certain facts could to be confirmed. Rolling Stone managing editor Will Dana issued a full retraction of the story and an apology. It is a report saying that the coverage classified a series of faults at Rolling Stone, avoiding the magazine trouble with the article if certain necessary reporting pathways that had been trailed. Written by Steve Coll, the Columbia Journalism schools dean; Sheila Coronel, the dean of academic affairs; and Derek Kravitz, an advanced research scholar at the University, wrote a report about 13000 words which were longer than the written article of 9000 words. Before the news were out Abraham Axler, who was the student body president, said some product had however originated from the article because it had been forced by UVA organize innovative rules and to expose a discussion on a topic that needed to be conversed across the nation.

But then again

some survivors and advocates were afraid of the retraction set back their growth. Rodrick also said that he felt like there was a chance that the people will be afraid to come onward. He then encouraged them that if came forward and shared their story, and if they did not have the date right, then every detail down, they will at some point thought they were accused of being a liar. It is even easier for me to keep it to myself. The dean of the Columbia School of Journalism as well claimed that there were far-reaching and unresolved questions about the university's performance.

He further suggested that Rolling Stone had only tried that subject up. He, however, went on to say that he would not say that all was about Rolling Stone's action of that issue was perfect, then it certainly did not come under the same group as their writing about Jackie's narrative. Rolling Stone officially retracted its explosive article about an alleged gang rape at the University of Virginia, after a top journalism school released a 12,000-word report with details of the magazine's journalistic failure in reporting the story. They later went on to say that the discredited story was being held up as a case study in failed journalism. Tara, 2015 it was also followed by the editors at Rolling Stone mostly blaming the feet of Jackie, the UVA student who was alleged of a brutal gang rape at a fraternity house formed the central narrative. Erdely s story.

However, the experts at Columbia, however, disagree that Jackie s status as an alleged gang rape victim was the primary reason that Rolling Stone

failed to uphold its journalistic responsibilities. Rather they said that their exhaustive review of the reporting and editing process concluded that, Rolling Stones failure with A Rape on Campus need not have happened. Even accounting for the magazines sensitivity to Jackie s position and that the explanation that Rolling Stone failed because it deferred to a victim cannot adequately account for what went wrong. The reason was rather an issues which stemmed from more fundamental failures regarding reporting, editing, and fact checking. This report noted that the magazines had not pursued significant reporting paths even when Jackie didn't an object which relied on pseudonyms leaned heavily on one source and failed to make any follow-up calls to verify key details. Jackie s account.

Members of the Society of Professional Journalists believe that public enlightenment is the forerunner of justice and the foundation of democracy. Ethical journalism which strives to ensure the free exchange of information that could be accurate, fair and thorough. An ethical journalist acts with integrity. The Society declares four principles which can be the foundation of ethical journalism and encourages their use in its practice by all people in all media. These policies include seeking the truth and reporting it, minimizing harm, acting independently and being accountable and transparent. Evidently Erdely gave the highest priority to being responsible and transparent as well but did not rather seek to minimize the harm her reporting could cause.

Evidently against the principle of minimizing harm which she accorded the least priority, she did not show compassion for those who were affected by news coverage. She also did not use heightened sensitivity when dealing with victims of sex

crimes in this and also did not balance the suspect's right to a fair trial with the public s right to know. She also did not consider the long-term implications of the extended reach and permanence of publication. It is explained below regarding how she tackled the matter. According to Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism s investigation and editorial flaws also existed, which may create gaps in the reporting, which can be addressed if the Rolling Stone editors and reporter would be more transparent about what they didn't know and what they knew at the time of publication. The report said Rolling Stones editors should have clarified that they didn't t know Drew s real name, and they had not confirmed his existence or gotten his side of the story (SPJ, 2015).

Also, according to the report, the editorial team should have clarified that the quote from Randall, who was the pseudonym of a friend of Jackie. The quote was in an actual sense only paraphrased from Jackie. Moreover, Erdely and her editors relied on a single source, Jackie, for the story without sufficient verification or corroboration. Instead, the team deferred to Jackie without independent confirmation (SPJ, 2015). In spite of these many failures which were evident, the report also does say that Rolling Stones senior editors have unanimously believed that the story s failure did not require them to change their editorial systems.

Managing Editor Will Dana says he does not think Rolling Stone needs to institute significant changes, but instead to do what we’ve always done to ensure this mistake is t repeated (SPJ, 2015). A commitment to citizens is more important than professional

egoism. It implied covenant with the public. The notion that those who report the news were not obstructed from digging up and telling the truth even at the expense of the owners other financial interests is a prerequisite of showing the story not only accurately but persuasively.

It is the basis of why we as citizens believe in a news organization. It is the source of its credibility. It is, in short, the franchise asset of the news company and those who work in it. Moreover, the greatest of the obligation of any journalist is to be loyal to the citizens.

In this case Erdely ought to have been loyal to her subject but unfortunately she was not. Consider the following philosophical principles every journalist should have. The main principles of journalism can usually come out below to provide an outstanding base for everyone who can aim to present themselves into the public evidence of sphere to show their responsibility in how they use information. We have hundreds of codes of conduct, charters, and statements which the media came up and professional groups outlining the ethics, values and obligations of the ability of journalism.

Though, most of them focus on five common subjects as shall be discussed as well as analyze them and weight them as well against the acts of Erdely, who was reporting for rolling stone. Journalists cannot always assure reality, but getting the facts right is the core principle of journalism. They should not at all times struggle for truth, give all the related facts they have and ensure that they have been checked. When they cannot verify information they should say so. Evidently the

element of accuracy was omitted or neglected by Erderly. Journalists must be self-governing voices; they should not turn, formally or informally, on behalf of special benefits whether political, corporate or cultural.

We should declare to our editors or the addressees any of our political associations, financial arrangements or other personal information that might bring a conflict of awareness. Jackie’s reaction as well raises questions on her independence. Erdely confused independence perhaps with standing alone and neglecting other parties something which made the outcome of her reporting catastrophic. It leads to the retracting of the article. Many stories have at least two edges.

While don't have any responsibility to present every edge in every piece; stories should be balanced and add background. Objectivity will not at all times be possible, and may not always be needed in the look, for example of brutality or mercilessness, but fair reporting builds faith and sureness. Clearly she only considered only one of the side of the rape issue making her biased. Harm should not be a key value to journalists. What they broadcast may be insensitive, but they should be aware of the impression of our words and images in the lives of others.

She did harm not only to the victim to whom she was less sensitive to but all to her boss whom she spoiled his image. She as well did harm to herself given the kind of enemy she involved. Who knows she might have even lost her job. A sure sign of competence and accountable journalism is the ability to hold them responsible.

When they bind errors, they must correct themselves, and their feelings of regret must be truthful,

not mocking. Again they should not to many any concern of the listeners. They may not alliterate what readers say, but we will always provide remedies when we are biased. This is perhaps the only aspect she considered. I strongly disagree with the acts of Erdely concerning the coverage of this particular incident.

Right from the beginning of her investigation, poor work was done by her editors and even later on Rolling Stone retracting the publication. Erderly acts are not justifiable all. Rolling Stone claiming that their senior editors had unanimously believed that the story s failure did not require them to change their editorial systems and even their Managing Editor Will Dana saying he does not contemplate Rolling Stone needs to institute important changes is a big fail to the media industry. The magazine essentially failed to find corroboration for Jackie s account from others students, university administrators, law enforcement officials but published her story regardless. The best way in which this case could have been handled is through first of all having in mind that good journalism is one who reports accurately, is accountable, and is aware of the effects or his reporting to themselves, their employer and the subject to which they are reporting about as well. Clearly Erdely gave little or no regard to all these aspects which saw reports in an unethical manner.

Secondly is through engaging all the responsible parties in the cause of the reporting. She should have involved other students, university administrators and if possible to have involved law enforcement officials as well. Through the dissection of this particular scenario, the role of media in society in the society

has as well been appreciated. Through the media various societal evils are brought into the light. However if not done with moderation, professionalism and impartiality the outcome might not be of any great help to the society as seen in this case.

Insights learned from class on ethical issues in the field of journalism, philosophies and loyalties related have as well helped in gaining a bigger picture of the issue at hand. References Doug Mataconis, 2015. ‘Rolling Stone's botched rape story: how bad journalism happens (+video)’. Retrieved from http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/Politics-Voices/2015/0406/Rolling-Stone-s-botched-rape-story-how-bad-journalism-happens-video Sheila Coronel, Steve Coll and Derek Kravitz, 2015 ‘Rolling Stone and UVA: The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism Report’ Retrieved from http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/features/a-rape-on-campus-what-went-wrong-20150405#ixzz47BONYcEE Tara Culp-Ressler, 2015. ‘Rolling Stone Officially Withdraws UVA Story, Blames Rape Victims’. Retrieved from http://thinkprogress.org/health/2015/04/06/3643120/rolling-stone-retraction/ SPJ, 2015.

‘SPJ Disappointed in Journalistic Lapses Found in Rolling Stone Story’. Retrieved from http://www.spj.org/news.asp?ref=1327

Get an explanation on any task
Get unstuck with the help of our AI assistant in seconds
New