The Ethics of "Storm Porn"

I first notice the hashtag #stormporn a few minutes ago when tweet titan Jeff Jarvis used it.

CNN guy standing in water when he could be standing on the pier right next to him. Needless, showoff idiocy. #stormporn

A quick search showed a flood (pardon the easy metaphor) of tweets and retweets describing what a Canadian reporter explained thus:


In an effort to grab higher ratings and boost advertising in a fiercely competitive market, some television stations are being accused of exaggerating, dare we say hyping, their weather forecasts.

Crippling ice storms, devastating tsunamis and powerful hurricanes enthral viewers like a drawn-out O.J. Simpson trial or the heart-wrenching coverage of 9/11. Hurricane Katrina had us mesmerized for weeks – and the ad revenue flowed.
It used to be that weather forecasters were criticized for getting it wrong. Now, in true Chicken Little style, it's being suggested they're consistently overstating their predictions – the depth of snow, the severity of wind-chill factors – urging the audience to brace for the worst.


David Phillips, senior climatologist for Environment Canada, calls it "storm porn."

The ethical implications are dual, are they not? First, it's a simple matter of factual accuracy, of either choosing to emphasize the most dire possibilities of potential weather disaster or, even more culpable, making stuff up. Second, it suggests one of journalism's numerous dirty little secrets, that journalists both yearn for and revel in disasters because the high drama implicit in such events if communicated bravely and well can make careers.( Lord knows I was thrilled with the Loma Prieta earthquake - instinctively, not intentionally, and only after determining me and mine were safe - and being lead writer on the collapse of the Cypress Structure was probably the highlight of my career.)

In this second case, we may be dealing with the difference between thought and action. Is there a moral problem - and morals and ethics aren't the same thing, right? - in having low or mixed motives while doing your job well? That is, if you do thorough, responsible, useful newswork, it really doesn't matter if your heart is cold and dark and your motive is building your brand?

I suppose the CNN reporter standing in water is an example of the first ethical lapse. I can't think there's much point in standing in water just to show that you can't walk on it, unless you spell your pronoun with a capital letter.

Discuss among yourselves, as they say.

Addendum: Does the following have an ethical dimension? I'm still thinking. *Warning: brief nudity.*

Our first essay concerns the ethics of interviewing. Anything questionable about his persistence?

The Ethics of Advising - or Not Advising - Students about Future Careers (Not journalism but still....)

The Ethics of Giving Every Opinion Equal Emphasis

Chloe's dilemma

My ethical dilemma for the blog is:

In the early 1970s Les Kinsolving, the religion writer for The Examiner, wrote several articles about Peoples Temple (a cult in San Francisco led by Jim Jones who later took his people to South America and made his followers drink Kool-Aide laced with cyanide resulting in the death of 900 people) prior to the mass suicide he had written several articles that went unpublished. The Examiner was censoring due to government restraints and threats from the temple. Was it ethical for The Examiner to censor in order to protect themselves rather than the people who eventually died in the cult?

Check out the published and un-published reports from Kinsolving - http://jonestownapologistsalert.blogspot.com/2007/10/les-kinsolvings-original-exposes.html

A video was taken of 16-year-old Derrion Albert being beaten to death on a Chicago street. The video was taken by a person whose sister attended the same public school as Albert, but was not involved in the fight. Questions were raised when this said person contacted Chicago's WFLD-TV station to sell the video for cash. Was it "ok" to puchase the video which contained raw and gruesome footage? (see link of video below) WFLD-TV's vice president and news director on editorial process, Carol Fowler, asked why the "videographer" did not do anything to help the teen Albert but only film the fight? In the Poynter article Fowler discussed why she decided to air the video in the news (after providing the police with a copy of the video).

As a journalism ethics student do you agree with the station's purchasing the video ($250) and then airing? As a sidenote, when aired on the news a warning was put on before the video for its violence.

Poynter website: http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=2&aid=172085

Video and Fowler's article: http://www.myfoxchicago.com/dpp/news/metro/reporters_notebook/derrion_albert_decision_carol_fowler

Laura's Ethical Dilemma

On the front page of a Sunday morning New England paper, three woman are shown shooting up heroine in a gazebo. The story is about the epidemic of heroine addiction in the peaceful town of Willamantic, New England. According to a report, reporter Tracy Fox and photographer Brad Clift earned the trust of these addicts after spending months in town. The photograph was part of a five part series. Critics are claiming the photograph was set up and the woman were paid to shoot up heroine in front of the cameras.

What do you think of the photograph? Do you find it offensive? Should the photograph be put on the front page? Does the fact the photograph takes place in a small town in a small town newspaper make the circumstances change rather than if it were on a more nationally known newspaper?

http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=53&aid=10958

In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina people took every measure in order to survive. The flooded streets signaled abandoned stores, full of whatever stock had not floated away. It was common for people to raid stores in search of food or anything else they could find. The Associated Press ran a few stories that featured photos of those who took from local grocery or corner stores. One photo featured a black male treading through the water with a plastic bag full of groceries; the other portrayed two white people, waist high in the flood water, carrying groceries as well. The two photos are almost identical and if you were to look at them you would assume both the white pair and the single black male are doing the exact same thing. Wrong. In the text attached to both photos the black male is allegedly “looting” while the white people have simply “found” these groceries. Apparently the photos came from two different news sources who captioned them differently. Regardless, should the AP have altered both captions? What are some of the ethical implications here? You can click on the picture to see the images up close.

Kevin's ethical dilemma

On Poynter, there is a link that tells about journalist Alysia Sofios, who let four members of a family traumatized by murder, abuse and incest into her home after she had done an initial story about them for Fox affiliate KMPH in California. She never told her news director about the arrangement.

After growing compassion for the criminal's (Marcus Wesson) relatives during her coverage of the story, she received a call from Wesson's wife asking for help. 8 months after Sofios let the Wessons into her home, Marcus Wesson went to trial and Sofios was asked to report on them again. Her boss asked whether she could cover the family objectively, and Sofios said she could.

Was this unethical of her? Should she have told her boss right away about the living arrangement? Is it even possible to cover a situation like this "objectively" if you were in Sofios' position?

EDIT - I realized I didn't link the article for more info. Sorry.

http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=101&aid=170213

.

Michael Tomasky, an American editor-at-large for the UK Guardian recently posted this video on his blog:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/michaeltomasky/video/2009/sep/17/barack-obama-anti-christ-republicans

In the video he discusses a new poll of New Jersey democrats and republicans. According to the poll, an astoundingly high amount of republicans in New Jersey think that President Obama is the Antichrist, or aren't sure but speculate that he might be. According to the video, in the same poll a large percentage of democrats that that former President Bush had prior knowledge of September 11th. I have many questions about this poll and the choice to publicize it. How valid was the poll? How was it executed? Was it a fluke or can it be checked? Does Tomasky have an ethical obligation to tell us a little bit more about the poll before reporting on it? Should the report contain more information than just the statistics on a poll and editorializing? On a more fundamental level, what are the ethical ramifications of giving this poll so attention when there are so many other things happening in the world? Discuss.

Does a murder involving someone from Harvard or Yale deserve more coverage than someone from another university, even someone from USF? It appears so. The murder of Yale University grad student, Annie Le, has received A LOT of media attention. As slate.com reports,

"The New York Times, one of several Ivy League house organs, has already published five articles about Le's disappearance and murder and the apprehension of suspect Raymond Clark III. The Boston Globe has published at least six stories about the case, and the Washington Post has run at least three briefs from the Associated Press. The Times of London, published five time zones away, can't seem to sate its appetite for Annie Le news. Even the proletarian New York tabloids—the Post and the Daily News—have gone ape for the story."

But why? Is there something about an Ivy League student/professor that is more alluring to the public? Are they worth more because their IQ’s are above average? Is it the public that is obsessed with the Yales and Harvards of the nation, or is it the media’s fixation? Furthermore, is it ethical to give more coverage to one murder over another based on something like the location it took place at or the person who was killed?

Here’s some articles about the crime itself… Just google “Annie Le” and thousands more come up.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/14/nyregion/14yale.html?scp=3&sq=Annie%20M.%20Le&st=cse

http://www.wfsb.com/news/21022287/detail.html

This article says Le’s brother was overwhelmed by the media coverage of his sister’s death:

http://www.news10.net/news/story.aspx?storyid=67274&catid=2

Here’s some discussion of whether Ivy League murders are more newsworthy:

http://www.slate.com/id/2228705/

http://www.newser.com/story/69731/ivy-league-crimes-are-more-equal-than-others.html

http://features.csmonitor.com/globalnews/2009/09/18/media-frenzy-over-yale-murder-draws-criticism/

Image by Getty Images via Daylife

Jonny's Ethical Dilemma

My ethical situation involves Jeff Gerstmann, former writer for upper division gaming site GameSpot.

I've included multiple mediums to soak up this dilemma. For the readers of the class:

http://www.gamepolitics.com/2007/11/30/free-jeff-gerstmann


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Gerstmann#Termination_from_GameSpot

For the video watchers:

http://blip.tv/file/518912

Aaaaand for the comic enthusiasts:

http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2007/11/30/

Message Ethics: Can You Be Too Entertaining with what you have to say? I've heard about the noise-to-signal ration. How about the fun-to-signal ratio?

Related articles by Zemanta

• Tila Tequila Shows Off Bruises, Allegedly From NFL Player Shawne Merriman (ballerstatus.com)

Ethics seems too refined a term to describe the professional shortcomings of this sports column.

But any writer can fall in love with her/his own cleverness. But how did the copy editing/editing corps let this through? Do they hate the guy??

The kicker:

And ballplayers, who always invent the slang no matter what ESPN would have you believe, came up with an expression for a home run that you might appreciate.

Congratulations, Jaycee. You left the yard.

Backing away from ‘multimedia specialist’ self branding


Some advice from a working reporter: Be a reporter first, to which you add multimedia skills.

Here's Brian's ethics post. I'd put this as my first question. What are the ethical implications *for the news organizations*? Is there any ethical concern for them? Brian raises some important legal questions. But is there an ethical dimension?????

From Brian:

Journalism Organizations Protest Big Ten Restrictions on Game Coverage

Yes another sports story but very interesting. They are putting restrictions on what journalists can use, including pictures and video, from college football games. They are severely restricting online journalists and bloggers.

Can these journalists argue based on their first amendment rights? / Do they have a realistic argument for protest?

Why are they being restricted in the first place?

What are the implications if they continue to be restricted?

http://www.poynter.org/column.asp?id=2&aid=169619

Related articles by Zemanta

• Rules for the Modern Journalist -- One More Time (socialmediatoday.com)

Number one thing: This ad is fun, and you may well empathize. But the story behind it could certainly inspire some ethical discussion, though perhaps nothing of relevance to journalism.

Except maybe this: Journalists don't stage events. (Except except, sometimes TV recreates certain news events. Damn.)

What news media ethical issues does this raise? You may have to do a little research to understand Pitino's remarks fully.