You Are What You Read
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
"'Facebook Friend #1276' read 'The World Mourns the Death of Dippin' Dots' on Yahoo!"
The latest in news-industry issues, as written by multimedia journalism and integrated marketing communication students at Simpson College.
The Pulitzer Prize Board has announced it is requiring all submissions to be digital starting in 2012.
Another person who participated in the News of the World's phone-hacking scandals, Bethany Usher, was recently arrested for participation in the phone hacking.
Recently, Nick Davies of The Guardian admitted to paying child prostitutes for information for one of his articles.
Davies claimed in a testimony before a U.K. Parlimentary committee, "I [paid them] for two reasons – first that I thought it was better for them to earn the money by talking to me than by allowing somebody to sexually abuse them; second that it seemed fair to them, if i was depriving them of ‘working time,’ that I should compensate them for their loss."
Even though Davies is writing on a very touchy topic is it ethical in any way to pay your sources for their time? If Davies hadn't paid the children to talk, would any of them spoken out to a reporter? Or would Davies's article consisted of facts, not first-hand stories, about the horrors of child prostitution?
A newspaper or reporter paying sources for information is known as checkbook journalism. According to the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ), the practice of checkbook journalism is unethical, wrong, and should not be used in any situation.
© Blogger template On The Road by Ourblogtemplates.com 2009
Back to TOP