[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Therewill be no easy solutions.One person may use utilitarian theory to supportrunning a story in the interest of the “greater good”; another person maycite Kant’s proscription against using a person as a means to an end as rea-son for not running the same story.What is most important is to use onlythose theories that apply directly to a given decision.The best way to ac-complish this is simply to answer the questions honestly while consideringall sides of the issue.A particular theory may not seem to apply from oneperspective, but it very well may from another.It is important to note that just because a particular theory seems to jus-tify a certain action doesn’t mean that the action is the right one to take.Re-member the weaknesses of the various theories discussed in chapter 4.Forexample, utilitarianism allows for otherwise egregious actions to be takenin the interest of the majority.Justifying a questionable act simply becauseit benefits a designated majority will not wash in the minds of most people.We cannot ignore these problems and must counterbalance them withother theories—in this example, perhaps, the theory of distributive justiceor the harm principle.In other words, we must not fall into the trap of choosing theoretical jus-tification only because it bolsters an already held position.We must chooseit because we have arrived at an option through the “agony of decisionmaking,” and the theoretical support we have chosen truly reflects our be-lief in the rightness of our decision.6.Determine a course of action based on your analysis.People often begin the entire decision-making process by coming into acase with a decision already in mind.However, as we proceed through thisworksheet, we are forced to look at each case from too many angles to havea fixed position.Remember, the decision itself is not as important as theprocess.The goal is to provide the tools needed to assess ethical dilemmasand to reason through them.There are no right answers, only well-rea-soned answers, which leads us to the final point.7.Defend your decision in the form of a letteraddressed to your most adamant detractor.As Stephen Carter has pointed out, a person of integrity will be willing andable to justify her actions to others.If we have truly thought through theprocess and made a decision based on sound reasoning, then we should beTLFeBOOK180CHAPTER 7able to defend that decision.The most appropriate person to defend it to isthat claimant who has lost the most or been harmed the most.The veryleast the people out there can ask for is that we, as a media representatives,have actually considered our decisions.AN EXAMPLEThe following case was completed by a college student.Although the caseis a fairly typical journalistic problem, it should be stressed again that theworksheet has broad application and is not limited to a single type of ethi-cal issue.The facts of the case will become clear through the explication.1.Issue:An activist group composed of concerned parents and several leading citi-zens has found a local paper’s series coverage of high school sex and thetransmittal of sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) offensive.The groupmembers argue that such coverage affects the moral character of the highschool and other students and does not belong in so public a forum as thelocal paper.They are also concerned that the identities of the studentsused as “case studies” in the series might be discovered, and that the repu-tation of the entire school district might be harmed.2.Relevant facts include:· Several leading citizens (including two school board members) havesigned a letter to the editor asking that the series be terminated.· Their concern is over the “delicate” nature of the topic in so public a fo-rum.· Some state that the names of the “sources” should be made known sothat they can seek medical treatment and not be allowed to “spread thedisease.”· The paper is the only one in town.· The series is also slated to cover the danger of AIDS and other STDs.· The paper has taken care to conceal the names of actual students it hasinterviewed.· Readership has dropped with the advent of “soft” news on local TV, es-pecially the tabloid type syndicated programs airing just before primetime.TLFeBOOKETHICAL DECISION MAKING181· As editor and primary decision maker in this case, I am aware that myown high school-age children face the same problems my paper is por-traying.· Special considerations include the need for confidentiality of sources,the general moral tenor of the community (it is fairly conservative), andwhether the newspaper is using the series simply to boost circulation.3.Claimants:· Parents: Parents seek some measure of control over their children’s be-havior, especially in the area of sex education
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
