Ethics Should Begin With Person, Not Employer (An Ethics Crisis in Journalism)

Foxnews ^ | 1-18-04 | Eric Burns

[Indy Pendance]

Conflicts of interest are the bane of the news business. Last year, CNBC was accused of one. It has now taken steps to prevent such a thing from happening again. As a result, no one can accuse the network of being soft on ethics. But is it now being too hard?

[Tacis]

No matter what employers say/require, journalists are going to be self-serving sleazes. Nothing will change that. Reuters may put down rules, but that won't stop mosts of their field people from working secretly as spy/informants for pay from Syrian, Saudi, Israeli or French national security agencies. The very concept that publishers build of today's "journalists" guarantees a lack of integrity. Take away bylines and remove the celebrity from news readers/writers and then, maybe, we can talk about some sense of media honesty.

[prion]

But I also know journalists who do not vote, because they think that would compromise their ability to view politics neutrally.

I'm sure they know who they'd vote for if they did vote, so I'm not sure I see why not actually pulling the lever makes them more impartial. Or are they telling themselves that not voting means they never think about the issues and the candidates and compare the two?

Self important, hypocritical drips, the lot of 'em.

[Steely Tom]

...journalists are going to be self-serving sleazes. Nothing will change that.

Self important, hypocritical drips, the lot of 'em.

I wonder, do journalists ever ask themselves "why do they hate us so much."

(steely)