Extra Credit Assignment 4

Ethics Wrap up. (Worth 6 points) Due Wednesday, March 10, 2010

Last week we talked about diversity in journalism and SPJ's Code of Ethics. For the first part of this exercise, I want you to think critically about and discuss your own biases. For the second part, I want you to read and discuss a story about former Gov. Rod Blagojevich.

Part 1

1. What personal biases do you have that might make you reluctant to approach certain story topics? (Could be religious, political, etc.) What specific topics might be hard for you to cover objectively?
   
2. If you had to do a story involving an issue you didn't agree with or have a strong bias against (e.g. a story on abortion and you're pro-life) what would you do? (Would you cover it? Why or not? How would you cover it, if you chose to do it? If you had a choice and you chose not to, why wouldn't you cover it?) (Use your own specific biases to answer this one.)
3. Do you think the media are biased? Why or why not? What can be done by journalists or by you to remedy any bias you detect?
   

Part 2

Read this story about the speech former Gov. Rod Blagojevich gave Tuesday. Kind of ironic, no?

http://www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/03/blagojevics-ethics-lecture-full-of-laughs----for-audience.html

1. Do you think the Tribune covered this story fairly? Why or why not?
   
2. If you were doing the same story, what ethical considerations might you to take into account (according to the SPJ Code of Ethics in your book)? Which ethical tenets might conflict and how? Is there a potential for libel?
   
3. How would you have done this story? Would you have done it the same way that it ran or would you have written it differently and how? Why do you think the Tribune ran the story this way?