J1 Blogs

 Loading ...

 Loading ...

Due: Sunday, December 12
Minimum Words: 400
All posts need at least 3 links.

Next week, we’ll begin the best unit in the class: The study of Ethics.

Ethics is a wonderful and scary world, because there are very few right and wrong answers. Everyone will come up with their own ways of thinking about each situation and case study we look at, and your classmates will surprise you and challenge you.

Before we can dive in to Ethics, it’s important to consider what your own morals and ethical codes are. I’d like you to engage as many of the questions below as you’d like in order to make an interesting post. Each of these questions may seem simple at first, but the harder you think about these questions, the more rewarding they will be.

It will be best if you DON’T go down the list and answer all the questions individually. The best responses will blend your favorite questions together and find links to support your ideas.

Please answer or incorporate at least one of the questions about Journalistic Ethics into your blog.

Your ethics:

How do you decide what is right and wrong? How do you know whether something is right or wrong?

What concepts, groups, teachings, or beliefs are you most loyal to, personally?

What are some standards that you have that can never be compromised? In other words, are there certain things you believe or values you hold that can and will never change under any circumstance?

Group and Professional Ethics

What groups are you a part of, and what are these groups loyal to?

Can groups decide what is right or wrong for other people? How?

If your personal beliefs about right and wrong conflicted with your profession’s loyalties and beliefs about right or wrong, how would you balance that conflict?

If your personal beliefs about right and wrong conflicted with your government’s beliefs about right or wrong, how would you balance that conflict?

Journalistic Ethics

To what things, people, or concepts should journalists be loyal?

How should journalists decide what is right or wrong?

Journalists can legally cover and write about almost anything that is of interest to the public, and they often run in to questions of right and wrong (not just legal or illegal). What rules would you create for journalists so that they can do the right thing most of the time? Consider the concepts to which you believe journalists should be most loyal.

Due date: Sunday, December 5.
Word Count: 350 or more.

Note: There are no right or wrong answers to this controversial topic. You are not going to be graded on how “right” your blog post is. Rather, you are going to be graded on how you came to your conclusions and the amount of critical reading and creative thinking you do on this topic. You are expected to read on your own, link to your sources, and come to a conclusion on this topic. Blogs without at least three links will not be graded.

The Issue:

Yesterday, the Wikileaks group released over 250,000 documents from the United States Government that are of a sensitive and classified nature. The documents, which anyone in the world can download, contain unflattering comments about world leaders and governments, as well as reveal secret negotiations between the US and other organizations and governments.

The leak is being called a “global diplomatic crisis“, and the United States is doing round-the-clock damage control to try and limit the negative fallout from this unprecedented leak. Some in the government are calling Wikileaks, and Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, terrorists and equating the leak with a direct global attack. Many governments are looking for a way to stop the information from spreading and stop Assange from getting access to any more sensitive information.

The United Kingdom may have taken steps to prevent national media outlets from printing excerpts of the report, possibly issuing a D-Notice, which prevents media from printing reports that could directly harm national security. It’s not a common occurrence, and no major media outlets have confirmed this. Also, some are skeptical of the timing of the US Government’s seizure of the domain names of many popular file sharing sites just a day ahead of the leak.

The New York Times printed a long look at the documents, both online and in print, summarizing the most important and damaging pieces of the leak. It also offered its readers an explanation about why they printed what they did. They reason that Wikileaks is a source, not a partner. Assange is an advocate for total transparency, and he feels that leaks like this help people see the world how it really is and government as it actually functions.  Some commentators are saying that the leak shows journalists how they can do their job better by not being afraid of or serving a government’s interests. Some unscientific online polls show large numbers of people supporting the public’s right to have access to this information.

Many people argue that raw intelligence like this is dangerous because it lacks context and interpretation.  Other people look at it as a positive step toward changing the way the government works and what information it keeps hidden. Some people argue that the information isn’t necessarily that damaging or, in fact, truly secret; that much of it is already obvious and not particularly damaging – just embarrassing.

Obviously the leak is a hugely important event on the global stage. Its affect is far reaching and means different things to different groups. What does it mean to you? What does it say about journalism?

Potential Questions:

Guess what? You should always make your own questions. These are a few of suggestions to get you thinking or get you started. Answer them (as many or as few as you’d like) in your own way.

1. What is your opinion on the leak? Is it good journalism, terrorism, or something in between?
2. Do you think that news organizations should ever print or report on important documents that could be harmful to national security?  Why or why not?
3. Should journalists help out their government and protect a country’s interests or make citizens as informed and knowledgeable as possible? How can they find the balance?
4. Is it okay for journalism to be dangerous or unpopular? When and How?
5. What’s better for America; a government that fears the press or a press that fears the government?
6. Can governments still have any real jurisdiction over media or the free flow of information in the 21st century?

Potential Sources:

In addition to the links in the description above, here’s a list of potential Sources of Information (you are more awesome if you bring in your own links). Not all of these sources are equally valid. Use your own discretion when using them.

• The Star Tribune summarizes the 9 key disclosures of the leaks and runs a story about the US scrambling to limit the damages this leak will cause.
• A video from CBS News that summarizes some of the damaging ways that the US has referred to world leaders and how the US is running damage control and offering apologies.
• CNN is keeping a running blog of updates on this issue. There are many sources, videos, articles, and reactions.
• The New York Times wrote an article explaining their decision to publish these documents, despite their danger to National security.
• US Congressman calls the people behind Wikileaks “terrorists.”
  • Here’s another source on this matter.
• Lady Gaga, thumb drives, and how Wikileaks obtained the biggest leak of classified data in history.
• What secrets were revealed by the leak.
• How the rest of the world is viewing the leak and the way it makes the US look on the world stage.
• A view of the potential consequences for the US.
• The US State Department has issued a warning to Wikileaks.
• The United Kingdom is forbidding its media sources to publish the details, saying that doing so is a direct threat to national security.
• Wikileaks main page. This site contains documents that been been described as dangerous to national security. Use the site cautiously.
• A video of the Wikileaks people defending the leak.
• A video and some analysis of Steven Colbert grilling the founder of Wikileaks last spring about a previous leak of damaging video. Scroll down the page for the unedited video to get the full-length interview.
  • This contains two sides and differing opinions on the purpose of Wikileaks.

• E. Ackmann
• W. Anderson
• C. Black
• N. Bonin
• T. Burg
• J. Busse
• K. Czanstowski
• E. DeVore
• M. DiOrio
• V. Etzler
• A. Findell
• K. Gatzke
• H. Gerhardson
• C. Hickman
• A. Krcma
• R. Kula
• M. Lubben
• M. Mack
• A. May
• P. Morehouse
• M. Moy
• C. Otto
• J. Peterson
• C. Risser
• A. Robasse
• B. Schnell
• S. Swanson
• A. Thielman
• M. Williams
• T. Wilson