Introducing
Prezi AI.
Your new presentation assistant.
Refine, enhance, and tailor your content, source relevant images, and edit visuals quicker than ever before.
Trending searches
Loading…
Copy of Journalism Chapter 2 Part 2
65
Transcript
Journalism Chapter 2: Part 2
Code of Ethics
- Responsibility—serve public’s right to know re: events of public importance.
- Freedom of the Press—guard right to speak, fight restrictions (“gag rules”), and show political problems, etc.
Code of Ethics
Guidelines for professional journalists adopted 1926—completely revised 1996.
Covers four key principles:
- Seek truth and report it
- Minimize harm
- Act independently
- Be accountable
III. Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier
III. Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier (p. 28) (2 of 2)
Code of Ethics
- Accuracy and Objectivity—no excuse for inaccuracies or lack of thoroughness—try to avoid “retractions”—corrections in subsequent issue; do not give opinion/comments on story.
- Fair Play—show respect for dignity, privacy & rights of those you encounter while covering story.
- Principal may censor if can “present a reasonable educational justification” for censorship.
- Later, S.C. added administrators have right to censor stories that were “ungrammatical, poorly written, inadequately researched, biased or prejudiced, vulgar or profane, or unsuitable for immature audiences.
- Editor & staff of student newspaper sued.
- 1988 Supreme Court gave school administrators power to censor!
- Paper part of curriculum = not public forum.
III. Hazelwood School District vs. Kuhlmeier
(1 of 2)
- Ethics—must not accept “gifts” that could bias; avoid conflicts of interest; be wary of “off the record” comments.
- Comments meant as background not for publication—consider whether comment is personal agenda or true—why off the record?
II. Bethel School District vs. Fraser (2 of 2)
- May 1983—school newspaper published with two articles missing.
- School had “prior review” policy—the review of proof of paper before it goes to press.
- Teen pregnancies—principal considered inappropriate topic & feared three girls in article could be (might be) recognized.
- Impact of divorce—principal said criticism of father violated journalistic fairness because the father did not have opportunity to respond.
II. Bethel School District vs. Fraser (1 of 2)
- Fraser sued & won in lower court.
- School appealed to U.S. Supreme Court—sided with school—students do not have same rights as adults.
- School board given authority to decide what was “offensive speech”.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?c4504759/bethel-school-district-v-fraser
- April 1983, 17 yr. old Matthew Fraser gave speech nominating another student for president at school near Tacoma, WA.
- Attendance at assembly was voluntary.
- Teachers had warned Fraser not to give speech due to “lewd content” (sexual metaphor).
- Fraser suspended & removed as potential grad. speaker for violating school’s “disruptive conduct rule”.
Choose a template
Presentations from around the world
Learn more about creating dynamic, engaging presentations with Prezi