Dealing with Ethical Dilemma Dr. Anand Pradhan Associate Professor, IIMC

Dealing with ethical dilemmas From the Top Down Many editors take the easy way out: whenever an ethical problem is brought to their attention, they make the decision and implement it from the top down. This approach has the advantage of speed. It ensures that no deadlines will be missed. The disadvantage is that it treats decisions about ethics as if they were simple matters of enforcement of rules set down by the boss. The decisions tend to be arbitrary and inconsistent over time. This approach discourages initiative from lower-level journalists to take decisions.

Bottom-up approach -A bottomup, teamwork approach recognizes that ethics draw strength from the commitment of each person to the values that underlie the norms. Ethics are largely self-enforced rather than imposed from above This kind of process recognizes that journalism is a team work.

Steps of ethical decision making 1.Consult colleagues and editors When confronted by an ethical problem as part of your work as a journalist, do not act alone. First, talk to a colleague, a fellow reporter, or your immediate supervising editor. Together, decide whether the problem can be resolved at that level or should be dealt with by bringing in other colleagues with specific responsibilities in the news organization.

2. Define the ethical problem. Is it a question of right versus wrong, or a more difficult question of right versus right, a case in which values conflict? Think which value is involved? Also about goal of your news organisation? Plan your strategy accordingly.

3. Check codes and guides. The code of ethics of your professional organization can be a valuable guide. Even more useful is the ethics and standards manual of your news organization, if one exists. But it may only suggest broad guideline and not specific answer to your dilemma.

4. Measure your journalistic objective. Journalists should satisfy themselves that general ethical values, such as seeking truth, acting independently, and minimizing harm, have not been compromised in the pursuit of legitimate but non-ethical objectives, such as speed, entertainment, brevity, increasing circulation, attracting advertisers or beating the competition.

5. Identify “stakeholders,” people who might be affected by the decision. Often there is a tendency to consider the points of view only of those in the room when we are discussing an ethical problem.

6. Ask: What are our alternatives? Every story can be written in many different ways. Often the ethical choice is not between publishing and not publishing. Our ethical decision may be to write the story in a certain way to achieve both the journalistic effect we seek and resolve an ethical dilemma. In some cases, writing an additional story to achieve balance and fairness is the solution.

7. Make a decision. Ethics is not a discussion, no matter how rich and interesting that discussion may be. A good discussion is not a decision. And in journalism we must act and be accountable for our decisions.

8. Be able to explain your decision. Is there anything about our motives, our reasoning that we would be embarrassed about if they were revealed?

Thank you