Ethics in Journalism (Essay Sample)

Student
Professor
Course
Date
Executive Summary
Journalists are often faced with ethical dilemmas in their day to day activities. One such dilemma is the issue of revealing names of sexual violence victims. Sexual violence is a sensitive matter that is likely to stigmatize victims and affect various aspects of their psychological well being. While the law in many countries assures journalists of their right of expression, this right must also be weighed against their social implications on individual persons. Revealing the names of sexual violence victims, for example, is likely to inflict pain on the victims and affect their relationships with other persons. Consequently, reporters must consider the implications of their actions rather than the economic value likely to be attained after exposing serious crimes of sexual violence. This paper examines the advantages, arguments for and against more restrictive policies with regard to exposure of personal information, and concludes that the identity of sexual violence victims should be concealed unless with express permission from the victims.
Ethics in Journalism
Introduction
An important facet about sexual violence is that it is surrounded by many misconceptions (Klein 3). These misconceptions affect the society’s perceptions about sexual violence victims and often hold them complicit. These misconceptions also serve to stigmatize victims, conceal perpetrators, and downplay or even justify sexual aggression against some members of the society. Instead of condemning and punishing perpetrators, these misconceptions often result in condemning the victims. In some societies, for example, victims are often viewed as the causes of their own predicament. In some instances, women are said to have caused their own troubles (Meloy and Miller 43). Consequently, the society appears to blame victims and induce more suffering to them. As a result, very few people report sexual crimes for fear of exposure and likely stigmatization. Sexual violence, despite its prevalence in many places, ranks as one of the least reported crimes due to this immense fear. The overall objective of this paper is to argue why the identity of sexual violence victims should be concealed and provide alternative measures of helping such victims. In order to achieve the said objective, the paper looks into the merits and demerits of concealing sexual violence victim’s identity.
Background
We live in societies which view rape and other forms of sexual violence as private matters between a woman and a man (Klein 8). Additionally, societies perceive sexual violence victims as their own enemies. For women, it is assumed that they contributed to the crime by being in the public space or even dressing inappropriate (Klein 10). Statistical data on sexual violence from many parts of the world indicate that a majority of sexual violence crimes is perpetrated by men against women. This complexity, introduces a new twist which tends to protect the perpetrators of the crime. Men who perpetrate sexual violence are often concealed and protected by their families, and in some instances by administrators.
Arguments for Adopting Restrictive Measures
There are many arguments that have been advanced by authors why restrictive measures that prevent exposure of sexual violence victims’ names should be adopted. Some of these reasons will be discussed in this section.
Stigmatization. In the early 1990s, rape and sex related crimes were rated as some of the most unreported criminal offenses in the United States and elsewhere. Despite legalization of media freedom, media houses adopted a non-disclosure principle that aimed at concealing the identity of victims. This principle was arrived at after a realization that sexual violence victims were faced with stigmatization following the disclosure of their identity (Klein 12). This stigma emanates mainly from the fact that sexual violence is associated with many misconceptions. Some of these misconceptions tend to elevate men while demeaning women. Consequently, a woman who is sexually abused is often seen as the cause of such abuse. Another misconception views sexual offenders as abnormal members of the society or drug addicts, which is not always the case. People who are sexually abused feel stigmatized as a result of being associated with such people. A third misconception that causes stigmatization results from the fact that sexual violence victims are associated with immorality. Instead of receiving empathy, these victims are often condemned, making them feel unwanted in the society. These misconceptions and many others, causes psychological torture after exposure of one’s identity.
Exposure of sexual violence victims, not only stigmatizes the victims, but also the victim’s family members and friends. Members of the society have a tendency of condemning a victim, as well as his friends and family members. Often, victims are seen as ill mannered persons making their parents and friends suffer condemnation with equal measure. No single parent would be happy to hear that his / her child being reported as a victim of sexual violence. Stigmatization is a negative consequence of exposure, therefore, adopting restrictive measures is ethically right going by arguments proposed by Mile's principle of utilitarianism that considers the consequences of actions (Green et al. 234). Mile’s principle considers an action unethical if its consequences are likely to cause harm on an individual (Miles and Michael, 222). According to a research report regarding stigmatization on Rwanda’s genocide rape victims it emerged that stigmatization from the society has continued to deny them peaceful coexistence with other persons. Several decades after the genocide, some women are still stigmatized and feel isolated from the society (Odeth Kantengwa 18).
Psychological Torture. Sexual violence is a humiliating crime that causes serious psychological changes in the life of the victims, this is in accordance with observations made by Itzin and others (Itzin et al. 4). Various studies indicate that sexual violence causes low self esteem, brings suicidal thoughts and affects the overall behavior of individuals (Heise 16). Some victim’s experience mixed reactions while others may entertain suicidal thoughts. Overall, victims of sexual violence require psychiatric care and anything that may induce negative reactions should be avoided. Exposing them through print and broadcast media only serves to worsen their psychological state. Exposure through broadcast media adds to the psychological torture and can be often construed as a way of mocking the suffering individual. Rawls’ Veil of ignorance (Rawls 39) can be applied to weigh the ethical standing of exposure of victim’s names with regard to social torture. If journalists can assume that they would be the victims, then it is obvious that they wouldn’t want anyone to expose their predicament in the public. Therefore, concealing the identity of victim’s appears ethically justifiable than exposing them. Bonnie and Annie reknowned authors on sexual violence further argue that individual victims should be given the right to decide whether their identity should be revealed or concealed (Bucqueroux and Seymou 24).
Interferes with Investigations. While the advantages of exposing criminal offenses by broadcasters and editors are obvious, their negative implications on investigations cannot be underestimated. Identifying victims of rape through the media often give suspects and their accomplices an upper hand in manipulating and hiding evidence. Once a suspect learns that his / her actions have been exposed through the media they, quickly swings into action and begins to destroy possible links. Additionally, they use the media as a source of information regarding the progress of the investigations, giving them an opportunity to frustrate possible investigations. Concealing the name of victims makes the stories anonymous, and denies suspects the opportunity to use the media as a source of information that may assist in destroying possible evidence. As a result, we can judge adoption of restrictive measures based on the principal of the categorical imperative in Kent. In Kent’s eyes the morality of an action depends on the action itself (Allison 16). Taking restrictive measures to conceal the identity of victims can help in seeking justice for them. As a result, hiding their identity is morally justifiable. According to a report attributed to the University of Menisota concealing victim’s identity plays an important role in finding justice for them and in enhancing the healing process (Sarah Hasselquist,6).
Complicated Recovery. According to Itzin and other authors, allowing a victim of sexual violence to suffer from public humiliation due to exposure complicates the recovery process (Itzin et al. 24). Exposing them to the public denies them the opportunity to heal without feeling alienated from the rest of the society. Once exposed to the public glare, victims feel condemned and hardly recover from the pains associated with the violence. Mile's principle of utilitarianism alludes that an act can be judged as morally wrong and right depending on its consequences. Adopting restrictive measures encourages quick recovery while exposure of identity yields opposite results. It is ethically right to conceal the names of the victim’s due to the positive effects associated with the action (Green et al. 236). In 2013 the Kansas star carried a story of two girls who had suffered sexual violence . The victim had been released due to insufficiency of evidence. This leads to social media bullying of the two girls . It is obvious from such media bullyinhg that the two girls would hardly recover from the orderal (David Eulitt September, ...