Who doesn’t remember hearing this sing song-y verse at some point as a child? From an early age we learn that secrets at once can be demonized and glorified simultaneously. Secrets can bring people closer as they form a bond between sharers, while alienating others not privy to the secret, thus making an innocent transfer of information seem mean because of exclusion it creates. Were not kids anymore though, and as adults, we must learn to deal with information that affects a larger population than just a circle of friends on the playground. Whether it’s the hundreds of people in your professional environment, or society as a whole, there may come a time when you face the dilemma of having a secret that you should or should not share. When that time comes, how you determine to proceed will be subject to praise or criticism, and it’s in your best interest to be able to support your decision when faced with a dilemma with critical thought.
Lets take the example of the well reported incident from 2006, where author James Fray was accused of lying about several facts about multiple arrests in his novel A Million Little Pieces, which was categorized as a memoir of his days as a heroin addict. This information was originally leaked by The Smoking Gun website. The site is known for publishing mug-shots of famous people so when they couldn’t find any in the court systems based on the arrests that Fray described in his memoir, they ran an investigation which was later published outing Fray as having lied in the memoir. The mainstream media picked up the story, and Fray soon admitted that he embellished parts, and even completely fabricated others; claiming to do so for the betterment of his writing. The fallout from this inquiry caused Frays literary agent and publishing house to drop him, the publishers to mandate subsequent printings of the book to include an author’s note about the altered content, and an offer to reimburse those who felt defrauded by the novel (if purchased before facts came to light and proof of purchase was valid). Fray went on media talk shows Larry King and Oprah to defend himself, with Oprah’s episode becoming somewhat famous for her strong interrogation of Fray since she had been a champion of the book at its start, having chosen it for the Oprah booklist.
The novel was on bestselling lists, and read by millions. The public believed that the accounts in the novel about Frays life as a heroin addict were true, and after the facts came to light, felt duped by both the author and the publishers who did not properly fact check the work before printing. To rationalize the choices this dilemma produced, (and after reading our text chapters), I'd say I identify the most with Bok’s model for ethical decision making. Our text summarizes Bok's model by stating, "Bok’s model is based on two premises: that we must have empathy for the people involved in ethical decisions and that maintaining social trust is a fundamental goal." Media Ethics: Issues and Cases (Page 4)
Following Bok’s three concise questions it seems one could approach an ethical dilemma with critical thought not just about from a personal point of view, but from a pluralistic view as well. The three questions are as follows:
How do you feel about the actions? (Will your decision let you and your conscience sleep at night)?
Is there another professionally acceptable way to achieve the same goal that will not raise an ethical issue? (Seek out experts, living or dead, to help you determine this).
How will others respond to the proposed act? (Conduct a public discussion/debate to determine this).
In my example about the author James Fray, I think it would be wrong to keep such news to oneself, however I’m not sure (and there is me being indecisive!) that the information was shared in an ethical manor. Let me break it down with Boks model:
How do you feel about the actions?
It’s not just for an author to claim fictional work to be biographical, convicting readers that your life turned out one way because of your actions could leave them to take from your experience certain outcomes that wouldn’t be true. But it’s also not fair to blindside someone (in this case Smoking Gun releasing info on James Fray without giving him a chance to refute it). In the court system you have to enter evidence before producing it so that both sides have fair access to it, I think that should be applied to instances like this. In this instance, keeping the secret wouldn’t harm people, unless you think one man writing a novel about drug addiction from a personal point of view is defrauding the public in a harmful way.
Is there another professionally acceptable way to achieve the same goal that will not raise an ethical issue?
Yes, Smoking Gun could have given notice to Fray and his publishers before releases this secret news to the world. I ran this example by a few co-workers in the communication field at my company, and the consensus was that sites like the Smoking Gun are valuable, but very "low brow" because of the manor in which they share news.
How will others respond to the proposed act?
I think that Smoking Guns traffic to the site relays heavily on their ability to produce never before seen information (that surprise element) if they followed the ethical course of discovering information and sharing it with the parties involved before sharing it with the world at large, it make might the pill a bit easier to swallow for the accused, but it wouldn’t benefit smoking guns website at all –though perhaps their researchers and writers would sleep better at night? – Doubtful!
There wasn’t much backlash against Smoking Gun for producing and publishing the information about Fray’s bad judgment in marketing his book as a truthful retelling of his life when indeed it was not. If anything it helped give credibility to their website once other investigations proved the truth of Frays lies. I think that if you’re in the media, you’re bound to get ensconced in secrets at some point or other. I would hope that those working in the media profession would carefully and critically think about their actions before using the tool of media communication to share such information.
No comments:
Post a Comment