Watching and reading news of the disaster in Haiti this past week has left me struggling with some of the ethical issues that arise in the world of journalism. Personally, while I acknowledge each circumstance is unique, I think that it’s important for a journalist to deliver the stories of people and what’s going on in the world to the public- perhaps the support for Haiti is so great because we are able to see what’s going on through the words, pictures and video of journalists who are there. BUT I think it is also just as important, as a human being, for a journalist to help if they can in a situation where it could mean life or death for someone.
Today, Anderson Cooper, a renowned journalist currently working with CNN, was reporting from Haiti when a young boy was injured during looting in Port-au-Prince. Anderson put down his camera to pick up the boy and carry him out of immediate danger.I admire Anderson’s choice to intervene and think it only strengthens his journalistic integrity, however, some may argue that there is a line between telling the news and becoming a part of the news that journalists should not necessarily cross. There are all kinds of arguments for each side of this debate, and what follows this post is a short essay I wrote for a class on this very relevant ethical issue.
Ethics of Telling the Story:
The Canadian Association of Journalists sets out the duties of a journalist “to seek and report the truth as we understand it and serve the public interest,” while minimizing harm as much as possible. Unfortunately, these two principles often come into conflict with each other. Journalists are often some of the first people on the scene; they work in zones of conflict and turmoil and are witness to emotional circumstances. As a result, images of death, despair and controversy are often captured on camera, film or paper. While it is one thing in deciding which of these images to publish and which should remain private, it is another dilemma when a journalist is on the scene and witnesses firsthand an event while recording it on camera, film or paper for the viewing of others.
In the event of a natural disaster or at the scene of a trauma, a journalist is faced with a choice: to help in any way they can to assist someone in trouble, or essentially, do their job and get the story. This is especially an issue with photojournalists and whether they should put down the camera and help in someway, or take the shot. For some journalists this may not be a difficult decision at all. Getting the story or the shot may be of more importance in some cases. For example, when the journalist does not know how they can help or if there are other trained professionals on the scene, there may not be much they can physically do to help. Some might argue that it is the greatest responsibility of a journalist first and foremost to tell the story and inform the public. Just as trained emergency personnel and police officers have a duty to assist and protect victims at the scene, perhaps the very role of a journalist is to take a step back from the scene, observe, record and report.
Say a journalist witnesses a man beating his wife. Should the journalist step in and attempt to stop the beating or would it be of greater value to capture this attack on camera in an effort to show the public a glimpse into domestic violence? How much should really be asked of a journalist- they already might expose themselves to dangerous situations reporting from warzones and other locations. Is it in the job description to risk your life attempting to save someone?
Images caught at the moment of something traumatic or shocking often illicit the greatest reaction from readers. In the case of war and issues of social awareness, a shocking image might prompt change or protest that otherwise would not have occurred. The image of Kim Phuc running naked from her village after a napalm bombing during the Vietnam War was so powerful it became part of the anti-war movement in the United States. Photojournalist Nick Ut, who shot the photo, acted first as a journalist by shooting the scene before commandeering a vehicle to take Phuc to the hospital. The outcome in this case was as good as it could have been. Phuc received medical treatment and survived the burns to her body, while her picture prompted social activism. What would have happened had she not survived? Would the picture have had the same impact on the world? Would the reaction have been even greater? Would Ut have been criticized for standing back and to photograph the girl, arms outstretched for help and running for her life?
In the best cases, these images prompt profound reaction and create awareness; however, if readers are so disturbed by the content that they turn the page, what value do these images and stories hold and was it worth it? What is the value of an image if viewers do not want to see it? Some news centres would prefer to censor and edit the images they release to the public.
Graphic images are at the centre of a journalistic dilemma between truth-telling while minimizing harm. Shocking images of violence and death inevitably affect readers, and may cause some harm to the families of those depicted. Ultimately though, these images are the truth, and in some cases, the truth may outweigh the harm few will experience.
Recently a photography student was riding the subway home in New York City when a man was stabbed on the car she was riding in. The student, Paola Nunez Solorio, 30, captured the last moments of this mans life through her camera as he staggered through the car for help. Nunez, though not a working photojournalist, stood back and photographed the scene. While passengers on board the subway car were surely frightened as they were trapped with both the dying man and his killer, this circumstance raises the question of whether it was ethical of Nunez to document the event, rather than assist in some way. But really, how much could she have done? None of the other passengers assisted the man as he bled to death either. The images Nunez captured in this case are snapshots of evidence but it is hard to argue that these photos are of very much value to the greater public interest. Thus, at what point does the release of some horrific images shift from social awareness to exploitation?
Where does the responsibility of the journalist lie to society? This is the question that journalists face on the job every day. They are forced to make a decision in fulfilling their responsibility as a journalist to tell the story or as a courageous person by trying to help a fellow human being. Ultimately, one must decide whether information is valuable enough to the public that all other rules go out the window, and, is the end value greater than the means? It is not clear-cut as to which is the right choice and it’s likely that each circumstance warrants a different response.
Melissa Greer - thoughts and words 