Examining The Ethics Of Undercover Reporting Media Essay

Examining The Ethics Of hugger-mugger Reporting Media Es opineIn a day in which we ar s unfinished thousands of man hours uncoering deception, we simply cannot deceive. How can newswritten document fight for m unitaryy plant and integrity when they themselves be less than honest in getting a account?Benjamin Bradlee, attainer exe issueive editor of the Washington Post. cultivation month, two high profile globe figures in Britain were the subject of shroud burn up trading operations which moderate cause widespread find outtroversy and debate. This essay bequeath analyse the effections of the diarist or newspaper editor in distributively suit of clothes, from both a deontological and consequentialist standpoint, which will serve to illustrate the ethical complexities b effectuate the whole concept of undercover reporting.Duchess of York plots to sell access to Prince Andrew, Mazher Mahmood, password of the military man, 23 May 2010On 23rd May 2010, the password of th e World inform that the Duchess of York, Sarah Ferguson, had been duped into accepting a $40,000 (27,000) cash down-payment from an undercover reporter posing as a sheik. The paper Investigations Editor Mazher Mahmood had offered the Duchess a total of 500,000 to be introduced to Fergusons ex-wife Prince Andrew, who is a British trade envoy. The group meeting where the deposit was handed over to Ferguson and details of the bounty were discussed was captured on tape, and this video was posted on the intelligence agency of the World website alongside the phrase.The News of the World may claim they throw done Britain a good service in exposing Fergusons illicit strain deals, but in reality, they have not testifyed all(a) proof that she had been kind in bribery and corruption before the News of the World entered the wear and staged this elaborate sting operation. They claim that they have proof that she had already cashed in by introducing two international tycoons to Pr ince Andrew, which resulted in remunerative business deals for which she gained a commission. Would it not have been enough to report on this evidence which had been provided by their c escape royal associate who blew the whistle on her? They say they have procured all the details of her transactions with these tycoons, and information round the new company Ferguson dance band up last month to apportion her illicit business, but have not presented any of these details in the article, or in any of the myriad of articles published just about the Ferguson subject since the videos were posted on the website. Yes, the News of the World did indeed ex coiffure that Sarah Ferguson was wedded to a corrupt deal with an international business man. But who is to say that she would not have been involved in any illicit transaction had the News of the World not set her up in this office?In April, other of Mahmoods undercover sting operations brought a wrong end to the c beer of snooker champion John Higgins when Mahmood filmed him in a hotel room in the Ukraine agreeing to fix a lose in an upcoming snooker match in exchange for 300,000. He had been set up by a group of undercover reporters posing as businessmen. Higgins has since claimed that he had been intimidated into the deal against his will, but has been suspended from snooker pending an probe, perhaps indefinitely. Mahmood claims that the decision to set Higgins up was establish on a tip-off from a sports insider that Higgins was engaging in match-fixing. However, no details or evidence was presented in the article to back up the claims. This is just another recent example of the kind of undercover reporting that Mahmood is engaging in for the News of the World, where a sensationalist scoop, usually involving a celebrity or public figure, is caught on camera, causes a brief media frenzy, but is quickly disregarded when the next sting operation hits the headlines.Mahmood, who has been posing as the fake S heikh for undercover scoops since 1984, claims to have exposed criminal activities in his sting operations which have led to at least 250 criminal convictions. His disguise has duped paedophiles, con men and drug pushers the exposition of whom could be deemed as beingness in the public interest as well as philandering government ministers and celebrities with volunteer(a) drug habits, whose stories may be of salacious interest to the public, but be almost certainly not in the public interest. The motivations behind the News of the Worlds obsession with undercover scoops argon simple deceit can lots be the quickest and easiest modality to get a story the diary keeper has control over the scenario that will heretoforetually end up in the paper, so essentially they can create the headline before the ensuant has plain taken place and secret footage (audio put downs, video, and grainy or absurd photographs) sensationalise the story hitherto further and make for great multim edia satiate for the web.The man suppose to bring sound judgment to the FA, Ian Gallagher, Mail on sunlight, 16 May 2010In another undercover expos last month, the president of the Football Association in England, master Triesman, was secretly taped claiming that Spain and Russia were plotting to bribe referees in the upcoming World Cup in South Africa. The interpreting was made by Triesmans former aide Melissa Jacobs during a luncheon meeting. Jacobs proceeded, with the economic aid of celebrity publicist Mark Clifford, to sell the tapes to the Mail on sunshine for a reported 75,000, who ran the story on the front rascal on 16th May. tour it moldiness be noted that the psyche who made the recording was not a journalist, but an associate of Triesmans, equal principles around the morality of clandestine recording and undercover investigation techniques are at issue here (leaving aside the ethics of chequebook journalism).However, at that place is one crucial difference b etween this article and the undercover sting operation articles written by Mahmood mentioned above, in that the scenario was not staged in advance by the newspaper. It appears to me, from the details presented in the article, that Jacobs attended the lunch meeting with the intention of getting taped evidence of their affair to sell to the newspaper, and the talk about the World Cup bribes arose unknown in advance to her. While she prompted him during the exchange for to a greater extent information, she did not incite the topic of converse, nor did she steer the conversation in any bad-tempered direction. This is demonstrated in the following replica from the tape, which is quoted in the article churchman Triesman Spain are tone for help from the Russians to help bribe the referees in the World Cup, their votes may then switch to Russia.At this point, Miss Jacobs asks Would Russia help them with that? nobleman Triesman Oh, I think Russia will cut deals.Miss Jacobs Why will Rus sia help? Are Russia in the World Cup? Lord Triesman No theyre not. Miss Jacobs Oh no theyre not, theyve got nothing to lose?Lord Triesman Absolutely nothing at all to lose. Exactly.Since the article was published, Lord Triesman has resigned as chairman of the FA, but stated that he had been a dupe of entrapment and his comments about the conspiracy were never intended to be taken seriously. Fifas ethics team is investigating the allegations, and if it is proven that they were based in truth, the Mail on Sundays decision to print the story will be vindicated (though this is looking increasingly un liable(predicate)). The article was met with widespread derision in Britain, most likely because the scandal seriously jeopardised Englands chances of securing their bid to host the 2018 World Cup. But the reasons prone by most critics were that the methods used by the Mail on Sunday to obtain information for the article were dirty and unethical.Consequentialist analytic thinkingAccordin g to the consequentialists, the ends must justify the means in sanctify for an action to be considered chastely acceptable. The morally correct action is that which brings about the highest possible total tally of utility(Wolff, p.49). It could be argued that in attempting to expose Sarah Fergusons corrupt activities, the News of the World were playing in the public interest, ridding the world of a corrupt act and frankincense bringing the greatest amount of happiness to the greatest number of people. If readers rightfully supposed that the journalist was acting to encumber the happening of mischief, pain, evil or lugubriousness to the party whose interest is considered, which according to Bentham, (The principle of Utility, quoted in Singer, p.307) should be the principal(prenominal) premise for any course of action, it could be argued that he was right to fancy dress as a Sheikh in order to expose Fergusons illicit business deals. Similarly, if the main motivation of the Mail on Sunday was to prevent corruption and match fixing during the World Cup, then the newspaper acted in the right way according to consequentialists. However, as I have explained, it is super dubious that these were the main motivations of the News of the World or the Mail on Sunday, as I would argue that they were more interested in printing sensational stories that would grab public attention and sell more papers than the ultimate end.While the strongest argument against untruths has been forward by Kant and the deontologists (see below), utilitarians were also powerfully against falsehood and deceit, because of the harm done by misleading particular individuals, and the style of false statements to diminish the mutual confidence that men ought to have in all(prenominal) others assertions (Sidgwick, Issues for Utilitarians, in Singer, p.316).There is another ethical issue embossed by the Sarah Ferguson expos article that would be of interest to a consequentialist, and th at is the use of unidentified sources. Tabloids like the News of the World are well known for give large sums of money to well-connected sources, and the information fed to them by their boney royal associate may well be legitimate. It is widely recognised amongst journalists and editors alike that it is worth retaining the identity of a source in order to get a story that is in the public interest, and I be fabricationve that this is also agreeable from a consequentialist standpoint. However, who is to say that this information, supposedly provided by a source close to Ferguson, was not entirely fabricated? As I have argued in a previous ethical enquiry, journalists should strive to assign their information as much as possible in order to increase assurance between reporter and reader. The reliance upon unnamed sources in articles like this leaves many questions in a readers mind, and if anonymous attribution was to be universalised, readers trust in journalism would be greatl y diminishedDeontological analysisThe concept of truth is central to Kants Categorical Imperative. Truth telling is more than just a good thing, as telling the truth creates trust, and trust is a social necessity. Communication between human beings in any society depends very much on the assumption that what we tell each other is true. Deception itself is an impossibility without this assumption, as a person cannot be deceived unless they are prone to believing what they are told. Kant steadfastly believed that any untruth, even if seemingly harmless in intent (or even uttered in protection of oneself or another) is harmful to society, as untruths diminish mans capacity to trust. A lie always harms another if not some other particular man, still it harms mankind generally, for it vitiates the source of law itself (Kant, On a supposed right to lie from selfless motives, in Singer, p.281). Mahmood engaged in alive(p) deception in order to get his Sarah Ferguson story. Everything abo ut the set up was a blatant lie his name, his profession, his intention, his promise to pay her 500,000 he even lied to her outright by denying there were secret cameras filming her when she asked in jest if it was a set up.Lies deliberately intend to deceive, where the aim is invariably to take advantage of another persons trust. According to Kant, what the honest but reserved man says is true, but not the whole truth. What the dishonest man says is something he knows to be false. Such an assertion is called in the theory of virtue, a lie it is a serious violation of a duty to oneself it subverts the dignity of piece in our own person, and attacks the roots of our thinking. (Kant, Letter to Maria von Herbert, Spring 1792, in Singer, p.283). Jacobs engaged in a form of passive deception in order to gather the taped material. She did not dynamicly lie to Lord Triesman, but deceived him by hiding her intentions, and the fact that she was taping their conversation without his kno wledge. Similarly, when journalists pose as members of the public in order to get a story, they are also being passively deceptive, as they are misrepresenting their true intention. However, this form of undercover reporting is widely accepted by editors the world over, even those that would vehemently oppose actively lying or setting somebody up in order to get a story.According to deontologists, the solution of the action should not be a factor in deciding what is right or wrong in any given situation. behaviour has a moral weight all of its own, which the moral law at heart can determine (Kant, The noble descent of duty, in Singer, p.41). Central to the deontological initiate is the concept of duty. From a deontological perspective, journalists have a duty to their readers, an obligation to present the truth to the public, regardless of the consequences that the revelation of this truth may produce. In the pillowcase of the Sarah Ferguson article, the News of the World publi shed the article with no heed to the consequences to the news report of the Royal family, and similarly, the Mail on Sunday published the article about Triesmans knowledge of match fixing with little regard to the reputation of Triesman himself or the chances of England securing their bid to host the World Cup in 2018. According to Kant, reality is a duty which must be regarded as the ground of all duties based on contract, and the laws of these duties would be rendered uncertain and useless if even the least exception to them were admitted. (Kant, On a supposed right to lie from altruistic motives, in Singer, p.281). If the News of the World and the Mail on Sunday truly believed that they were bringing the truth to the public in exposing Sarah Fergusons corrupt business deals, and Lord Triesmans knowledge of game-fixing, then their intentions were correct according to deontologists. However, in reality, selling papers overrides most tabloids altruistic motives, and it could be s trongly argued that both are more concerned with entrapping public figures in order to sell papers, and thus they are not acting in accordance with the categorical imperative.Objective reporting, one of the most central tenets of good journalism practice, rests on the premise that the journalist remains a passive observer of the material about which they write, and that they record reality the way it is rather than attempting to shape that reality themselves in order to create a story. Most, if not all, ethical guidelines for journalists state that an undercover journalist should be a witness to the action, not an instigator or an active participator, nor should they do anything to prompt an action that would not have occurred should they not have been there. Above all, the journalist should never incite people to commit a crime. However, News of the World exposs, many conducted by Mahmood in disguise, have increase ethical questions over the entrapment of celebrities by journalist s working at the paper. Critics have claimed that such undercover operations are an invasion of privacy, and that public figures are being lured under false pretences into doing and saying things that they would not have, had they not been prompted or boost by the undercover journalist. His elaborate scenarios are staged to entrap the subject, who is manipulated, often into committing a criminal act (Mahmood often stages drug purchases last November he set up a cocaine deal with Ted Terry, father of face footballer John Terry, also for a News of the World exclusive). one and only(a) of the main considerations a news organic law must take into cipher when deciding if deceptive undercover reporting is warranted is if this is a legitimate and suited news story, i.e. is the story in the public interest, or is the news organisation merely pandering to its audiences desire for a salacious story? Many editors, and television set producers especially, act under the premise that dece ption may be warranted when the story is of such importance that it absolutely must be told, and deception or undercover reporting is the only way to prove what is going on. The article about Lord Triesman combined his claims about match-fixing with an expos of his illicit romance with Jacobs in 2008. Details of text messages sent between the two, and accounts of their secret dates were recounted. This aspect of the article is a blatant invasion of Triesmans privacy, and is most certainly not in the public interest. It would also be against Kants Practical Imperative, which states that we should act so that you dainty humanity, whether in your own person or in that of another, always as an end and never as a means only. (Kant, The Categorical Imperative, in Singer, p.279). Individuals are ends in themselves, and they may not be sacrificed or used for achieving of other ends without their consent. (Robert Nozick, The Rationality of Side Constraints, in Singer, p.261). By publishing the delicious details of their affair alongside the quotes from Triesman about the match-fixing, the Mail on Sunday were using Lord Triesman as a means to an end, and also doing themselves a disservice by highlighting the sleazy element of undercover reporting. other fundamental question that journalists and editors must ask themselves is whether deception is the best way to uncover the story? In the case of Sarah Ferguson, I believe that based on other knowledge and evidence that they claim to have in their possession, the News of the World could have built the case against her without staging a fake bribe. However, in the case of the Lord Triesman article, there would have been no other way to find out his thoughts on match-fixing. Unless he was attempting to chance on her in some way with empty rhetoric, there must be some foundation behind Triesmans claims that Spain and Russia were engaging in bribery, which is in bend dexter worthy of serious investigation and a matter of p ublic interest, which has been strengthened by Fifas decision to carry out a full investigation of the matter.ConclusionIt can thus be concluded that neither the News of the World article nor the Mail on Sunday article were handled in a manner that would have been acceptable from a consequentialist or a deontological viewpoint. Though I believe the subject matter of each (Sarah Fergusons desire towards using her royal connections for corrupt means, and Lord Triesmans claims of match-fixing) were indeed in the public interest, the deceptive means by which the end was achieved in each case were morally deplorable, and neither end justified the means. According to Kants Categorical Imperative, we should act only according to the maxim by which you can at the homogeneous time will that it should become a universal law. (Kant, The Categorical Imperative, in Singer, p.274). The principle of universalisability is at the core of deontological theory. If active deception was to be univers alised, trust, a central tenet upon which society rests, would crumble. Honesty is the moral virtue at the centre of any society, and it should be promoted by all as all stand to gain from it, as trust rests on truth, and trust is a social necessity. Impersonation and subterfuge irrevocably undermines the implicit trust that is so essential between journalists and their sources and interviewees. Undercover reporting disseminates a widespread misgiving of journalists amongst the public, which is detrimental to the whole practice of journalism, which relies so heavily upon information original in confidence from that public.