Ethical or money…..

On August 31, a collection of about 200 private images of various female celebrities, and most of them containing nudity, were posted on the imageboard 4chan, and later appeared on other websites and social networks (August 2014 celebrity photo leaks, wiki). The Guardian criticized this action as an “invasion of privacy for their subjects” (If you click on Jennifer Lawrence’s naked pictures, you’re perpetuating her abuse, The Guardian, 1 Sep).

Apparently, this leaks case has illustrated the crisis in online privacy protection; however, ethical issues should also be taken into account. Those private images was released and reposted by online participators. In the online media forms, media participants could receive and disseminate the information simultaneously (Hill,S and Lashmar,P, 2014, p7 ), consequently, those contents which disseminated by online participants could be defined as online journalism. Although in this particular case, those contents were distributed by non-professional online journalism participators, it also provides some issues which should be concentrated by professionals who specialized in online journalism.

 

 

Online journalism

In this specific case, those images triggered larger scale of debate in public. Cherwell seriously criticize those contents and journalism, they assert that all the contents are focusing on “how to make money”, and there are no ethical codes have been followed in those contents. (Money or Morality – what really motivates the media, Meaney, S, Cherwell, 2014). It seems that ethical issues are very important in journalism.

In the early 2014, O’Donnell, McKnight and Este argued that ‘ethics’, ‘news worthiness’ and ‘public benefit’ as the top three points in criteria of assessing ‘excellence in journalism’ (O’Donnell P, McKnight, D. & Este J. 2014, p38). “Ethics” is one important part to evaluate the quality of the journalism, not only mainstream media, but also online journalism.

In addition, not only mainstream journalism, but also online journalism is seeking for monetary profit. (O’Donnell P, McKnight, D. & Este J. 2014, p41) As a result, the news producers will generate contents which could attract audience. The case entirely illuminates this point, they using celebrities’ privacy to attract financial support, because the “private lives will attract great public interest”. (Turner, 2014, p305)

 

Ethical challenges

It has been mentioned that the three top points in evaluating the quality of journalism. They are “news worthiness”, “ethic” and “public benefit” (O’Donnell P, McKnight, D & Este J. 2014, p38). The “celebrity photo leaks” case could be analyzed in those angles.

The first element is new worthy. According to Lamble’s (2013, pp46-pp52) argument, news worthy has been defined into six areas: significance, proximity, conflict, novelty, human interest and prominence. The journalism contents for “celebrity photo leaks” case are entirely suitable for those parts. For one thing, Tumer argues that celebrities’ private lives have great attraction for audience (Turner, 2014, p305), those content seems to satisfied audiences’ interest. For another, those images contain celebrities’ private information, which are rare. Lamble asserts that “significance” is relevance to the scale of audience, who are attracted by the event, (Lamble, 2013, p46) he also claims that “proximity” relates to the news contents which are “close to us emotionally….and socially”, as consequence, the journalism could be defined as significance and proximity. In addition, those photos contain nudity fragments and it launched great debate through audience. Lamble also states that if the contents are “strange and bizarre”, it could be more attractive; as a result, those debate and unusual images could satisfy the novelty and conflict.

If the evaluation standards only focus on “news worthy” area, those journalism contents could be defined as “excellent news”. In fact, those news contents have receive large scale of criticism, because those contents only focus on “attracting audience and making money” (Money or Morality – what really motivates the media, Meaney, S, Cherwell, 2014) and ignoring the information acquirement methods which involved by those media and privacy issues inside. As a result, online media ethics tend to be the most important aspect in influence the quality of online journalism.

On the one hand, there are some proponent who support Catharine Lumby’s view, (2014, pp347-349) she arguers that the main aspects of media ethics problems are many media participants do not establish their awareness in media ethics (Lumby, 2014, p348), in addition “much media content is produced by amateurs and redistributed by professional media” (Lumby, 2014, p348), as a result, those unethical contents could appear in online media. On the other hand, O’Donnell, McKnight and Este have entirely different view about online media participants and contents; they declare that in “purely commercial terms” media participants are trying to “attract consumer and advertiser support for their websites” (O’Donnell P, McKnight, D. & Este J. 2014, p41). It seems that all online journalism participators are concentrating on monetary support, not only amateurs, but also professionals. Some facts in the celebrities leaks case may proof the point which made by O’Donnell, McKnight and Este. Those contents were generated by some media participants who were fully understand the “news worthy” and “public interest”, they are professionals in producing news contents. They understand the code of media ethics entirely; however, they broke the ethics deliberately to seek for financial profit.

Furthermore, other weaknesses in online journalism participants also have negative impacts on the ethical issues. First, in recent journalism phenomenon, there are rapid accelerations in online journalism(O’Donnell P, McKnight, D. & Este J. 2014, p41); however the regulations about media ethics are still focusing on “traditional journalistic ethics” (Lumby, 2014, p346). As a result of lacking regulations, Lumby asserts that “news production is largely driven by ratings and readership, not by…but by serving up material that interest the public” (Lumby, 2014, p347). It seems that shortage in media ethics regulations is one aspect which has negative effect in media ethics. Second, the self-regulations pattern in media has weak

Personal media and mass media

 

On the March 2014, an American media participant Liz Wahl, who work for RT America channel in Russia, criticized the “Russia’s invasion to Ukraine” on one of her TV show and said she will quit her job after she finish her report. After she quit, the channel has published a statement on their website it said “When a journalist disagrees with the editorial position of his or her organization, the usual course of action is to address those grievances with the editor, and, if they cannot be resolved, to quit like a professional. But when someone makes a big public show of a personal decision, it is nothing more than a self-promotional stunt. We wish Liz the best of luck on her chosen path.”

The statement asserts her action as a “self-promotional stunt”, and mentioned that this kind of action was not suitable on a public show, same thing happened in the comments under the video, many YouTube user criticized her action, they said what she do is the “American propaganda”.

In my opinion if Liz Wahl posts this criticism on her own social media account, no one will blame her, but that action has been done on the public as a news report. The news report should be objective and fairness, and what she has done was entirely unsuitable for public show.

In addition, if she has post her comments on social media, in my consideration she would not in trouble, that is the gap between mass media and personal media. First, we should understand the different between mass media and social media.

Mass media; which has been defined as intend to use diversified media technologies to reach a large audience by mass communication. Roger Wimmer and Joseph Dominick assert such technologies include print, recordings, cinema, radio, television, internet and mobile phone. On the other hand, personal media is using for specific person and donate person-to-person communication; in addition, the advanced technologies like blogging, podcasting and internet video allow personal media users disseminate and gathering information.

Because there are huge audiences for mass media, a small mistake could cause serious misunderstandings. Obvious, Liz Wahl has presented that report for her own purpose, those information has disseminated in few seconds, no backup plan could be use to avoid that condition. On the contrary, the personal media is more private and emotion; every one could release their ideas and opinions. In my point of view, the different characters in mass media and personal media generate the different information.

Apparently, the content in personal media is more casual and flexible than those in mass media. The example is easy to be found, like writing blog, FACEBOOK, and twitter post, if I am writing media release or piece of news for newspaper or TV channel, it will be done in a formal and objective style. In addition, the most important different of mass media and personal media is “the point of view”. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s7bkHu27P5o) Professor Shigeru Miyagawa said in personal media the user could discover their own opinions, on the contrary, the mass media audience could only receive opinion form media outlet. Despite the argument on Liz Wahl, she was using mass media to accomplish her own personal media achievement, it is entirely unsuitable.

However, personal media itself could generate some problems, according to the characters of personal media. Users may hold their own point of view or believe idea which they preferred; consequently, arguments and debates may happen between those who held different opinions, insult, abuse, and libel could appear. There is an example shows that kind of phenomenon, the video has been post on YouTube, after Liz Wahl has claimed her decision on the show. There are many debate in the comments which made by audience who watch “her decision”.

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2h79v9uirLY)

Apparently, those strong words are prohibited in mass media, but it is ordinary in personal media. In my own point of view, debates could be allowed; those strong words and insulting may be prohibited. I think some censorships form could be established, to purify the personal media discussing environment.

.

 

 

 

 

 

Type of Media

http://www.globalization101.org/types-of-media-2/