This past week The New York Times' editor Arthur S. Brisbane asked his readers if truth was necessary in journalism. Let me sum up my response Mr. Brisbane: CBS and the Bush National Guard Story. Still not convinced? Stephen Glass of The New Republic.
Journalism at its most basic level is designed to keep an eye on society, politics and government to make certain that there is an unbiased view of every vote, situation and decision being presented to the American people. How are your readers supposed to believe in your company and in the news you are presenting them if they know it is fake, not research and just published? If they wanted news with no evidence or proof they would venture to the tabloid section of their grocery store. The New York Times, I believed, has better standards to uphold.
In Sept. 2008, the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes, known as 60 Minutes II released a news story about President George W. Bush's time with the National Guard. Within hours of the story airing, the American public watched as one of the nation's major news companies was questioned in the most serious fashion.
George W. Bush was up for reelection and his military service history was coming to surface. CBS news received documentation that lead producers and news journalists to believe that Bush had defied direct orders from his superior while stationed in Texas with the National Guard. Additionally, other documents lead CBS to believe that one point Bush was in Alabama instead of serving time with the Texas National Guard. The days following the story airing, many of the sources CBS worked with in order to present a truthful story were suddenly changing their stories, some to the extreme of telling CBS executives and members of the unbiased committee formed to look at the story, that they never shared information about President Bush with members of the CBS 60 Minutes II teams.
Following the findings of the unbiased committee, which including members of the Associated Press, CBS asked four of the its executives to resign and the story producer was terminated. In November, Dan Rather announced that he was stepping down as anchor of 60 Minutes II. The organization under went suggestions from the unbiased committee that reviewed the story, leading to many changes within CBS in order to develop past this point in its history.
Another company that grew passed its once momental problems is the political magazine, The New Republic. Turned upside down by Stephen Glass, the magazine had one of its best writers caught red handed by Forbes Digital Tool for fabricating a story about a teenage computer server hacker, according to Vanity Fair.
Beginning with gracefully woven stories of truth and fiction, Glass found himself the "protege" of The New Republic, but with each new story Glass found a need to upstage himself. As his time at the political magazine continued he worked with three different editors, it was the last Charles Lane, known as "Chuck," who would finally place together all the pieces that lead to the discovery that Glass completely fabricated "Hack Heaven," a story about a teenage hacker who was being paid by a California company to not hack into their servers, according to Vanity Fair.
When Glass roped his younger brother into playing the part of one of his fabricated executives, Lane found himself with no choice but to fire Glass and publish an apology to the dedicated readers of The New Republic, notifying them that Glass had fabricated 27 of the 41 stories he had written for the paper, according to "Shattered Glass" and Vanity Fair. Hoping that the magazine would be able to continue functioning in the wake of lies.
All this Mr. Brisbane to say that the truth is the foundation of journalism. Report the truth, the hidden answers and the sought after stories - even if it might contribute to the collapse of your network; this action is simply the ethically right route to take.
Although I do not necessary agree with how these companies handled their situations, they owned up to the situations they discovered. They owned up to what could have potentially ruined their companies; I think you, the writers of The New York Times and journalists all over can do the American public the same courtesy of reporting the truth, really finding the truth on all aspects of American life, rather it is political races, government choices, protests or any other event. We, the readers and citizens of America deserve that much.
Journalism at its most basic level is designed to keep an eye on society, politics and government to make certain that there is an unbiased view of every vote, situation and decision being presented to the American people. How are your readers supposed to believe in your company and in the news you are presenting them if they know it is fake, not research and just published? If they wanted news with no evidence or proof they would venture to the tabloid section of their grocery store. The New York Times, I believed, has better standards to uphold.
In Sept. 2008, the Wednesday edition of 60 Minutes, known as 60 Minutes II released a news story about President George W. Bush's time with the National Guard. Within hours of the story airing, the American public watched as one of the nation's major news companies was questioned in the most serious fashion.
George W. Bush was up for reelection and his military service history was coming to surface. CBS news received documentation that lead producers and news journalists to believe that Bush had defied direct orders from his superior while stationed in Texas with the National Guard. Additionally, other documents lead CBS to believe that one point Bush was in Alabama instead of serving time with the Texas National Guard. The days following the story airing, many of the sources CBS worked with in order to present a truthful story were suddenly changing their stories, some to the extreme of telling CBS executives and members of the unbiased committee formed to look at the story, that they never shared information about President Bush with members of the CBS 60 Minutes II teams.
Following the findings of the unbiased committee, which including members of the Associated Press, CBS asked four of the its executives to resign and the story producer was terminated. In November, Dan Rather announced that he was stepping down as anchor of 60 Minutes II. The organization under went suggestions from the unbiased committee that reviewed the story, leading to many changes within CBS in order to develop past this point in its history.
Another company that grew passed its once momental problems is the political magazine, The New Republic. Turned upside down by Stephen Glass, the magazine had one of its best writers caught red handed by Forbes Digital Tool for fabricating a story about a teenage computer server hacker, according to Vanity Fair.
Beginning with gracefully woven stories of truth and fiction, Glass found himself the "protege" of The New Republic, but with each new story Glass found a need to upstage himself. As his time at the political magazine continued he worked with three different editors, it was the last Charles Lane, known as "Chuck," who would finally place together all the pieces that lead to the discovery that Glass completely fabricated "Hack Heaven," a story about a teenage hacker who was being paid by a California company to not hack into their servers, according to Vanity Fair.
When Glass roped his younger brother into playing the part of one of his fabricated executives, Lane found himself with no choice but to fire Glass and publish an apology to the dedicated readers of The New Republic, notifying them that Glass had fabricated 27 of the 41 stories he had written for the paper, according to "Shattered Glass" and Vanity Fair. Hoping that the magazine would be able to continue functioning in the wake of lies.
All this Mr. Brisbane to say that the truth is the foundation of journalism. Report the truth, the hidden answers and the sought after stories - even if it might contribute to the collapse of your network; this action is simply the ethically right route to take.
Although I do not necessary agree with how these companies handled their situations, they owned up to the situations they discovered. They owned up to what could have potentially ruined their companies; I think you, the writers of The New York Times and journalists all over can do the American public the same courtesy of reporting the truth, really finding the truth on all aspects of American life, rather it is political races, government choices, protests or any other event. We, the readers and citizens of America deserve that much.
No comments:
Post a Comment