R.G. Loc: Scotland

I don't know what you're referring to.

Darkroom317 Loc: Mishawaka, IN

In my opinion, one of the largest ethical issue I see facing newsrooms today is the destruction of two walls in the newsroom. One is the reporting / opinion wall, the other is the editorial / advertisement wall.

While newspapers are generally clearly marked with news and opinion sections, it is not always clear in other media. Television "news" is a place where this becomes slippery, with few actual journalists on screen but rather commentators that mix fact and opinion. It is even worse when considers the idea of "infotainment" which stretches it even further. Local media tends to be less biased and more on the ground, however, the consolidation of media companies is eliminating much of the autonomy of the stations.

The collapse of the editorial/ advertisement wall has led to the rise of the "advertorial." This is an advertisement that is written like a news article in order to trick the reader. The lack of this wall also means that newsrooms may edit or omit news that might reflect poorly on advertisers which would lead to a pulling of funding. This complicates things allowing corporations tom dictate what may or not be covered and what may or not be published.

Nancysc

I can't add anything to what others have already said, but I will say that I am envious of you having this opportunity to work with and teach young people. I taught high school English and chemistry for a few years and led the classes in discussions of ethics and intentions. (yes, even in chemistry!).

Please let us know how this program progresses and maybe post a few photographs.

couch coyote Loc: northern Illinois

Well, yes, as someone who wasn't there being tested, my response was facile and judgmental. I cherish an ideal of myself as someone who stands up for the weak, but I don't 100% of the time. We all stand up sometimes; we all have feet of clay sometimes. The times I've had feet of clay are the ones I bitterly regret and can't forget.

That, too, might be a good lesson for the kids: try to imagine the eventualities beforehand, so you aren't caught flat-footed in the moment. Not ethics, but the example that comes to mind is the photographer who got iconic erupting-volcano footage - but died doing it. Always leave yourself an exit, lol. Maybe the ethical application would be to cultivate a self-image that says, "I'm a person who does my very best to portray truth."

rplain1 Loc: Dayton, Oh.

An equally serious problem is when the people at the top of the food chain refer to any news that happens to refute something they said or puts them in a bad light as "fake news". Or even worse - becomes a "hoax". And now the reader is faced with deciding which party to believe. When I was much younger, maybe I was naive but I believed most of what was in the newspapers. I lived in a city that had two daily papers - one with a Republican slant and one with a Democratic slant. But for the most part that was evident only in the op-ed section. If you only read the news - even news out of Washington - there was little difference between the two. Now when you read almost any newspaper or news magazine it's almost blatantly obvious which side is being reported.

williejoha

Replying to couch coyote on the point of bystanders in the George Floyd tragedy.
We just buried a civil rights leader that gave all of us a perfect example to those questions. Inaction can be complicity. IMHO
WJH

aellman Loc: Boston MA

How so?

R.G. Loc: Scotland

Indeed. If there's an inconvenient truth or an embarrassing disclosure that you want to discredit, refer to it as fake news. It's also a way to cast doubt on the credibility of a source. It's not an exaggeration to say that there are some who want to deliberately create that kind of atmosphere.

TreborLow

Glad you asked the question and happy to see so many excellent responses. I am a total amatuer and not at all experienced in photojournalism, so my two cents are overvalued, but.... Using a telephoto will also compress the image and that is usually obvious. Lightening and darkening is much more subtle and should be avoided, but the question is "How?" You can't ask someone to hold up a gray card during a bank robbery to make the robber look more sinister. With Digital, there is data recorded along side each image and will show adjustments to the exposure, perhaps the 'editor' should check that out.
Finally, as a retired teacher, I like to challenge students, sometimes with silly hypotheses just to make them think. You might either create yourself, some dual versions and see if they can detect with is real, etc. Or, you could ask each team to do the same and challenge the other teams. Discussing those results will put the issue into 'sharp focus'.
In any event, it sounds like a wonderful opportunity for those student to really grow. Congratulations and good luck.
Bob

Bob Werre

Probably, at this time we need to bring in...good cop vs bad cop!
I do remember way back in early grade school we had a little paper called the Weekly Reader! I remember reading about how scientists suggesting that the world was going to enter a new ice age, then a year later how a different batch of researchers would mention a new period of warming! Now 55 years later we 'might' be getting a better idea of what is going to happen! So if you were a writer or photographer you'd have to find things that point to your or your editors slant.

Remember of all the industrial smoke stacks proving that 'industry was great-- then 25 years later I was told don't shoot them because of the pollution factor! or remember DuPont's 'Better life through Chemistry' slogan! Then look at all the Super Fund sites.

Don't forget we had the famous photographer, Eugene Smith who was severely beaten by Japanese fishermen when he did a portfolio of children with birth defects. In many ways things haven't changed much!

Crad1998

I worked as a news reporter for ten years. My boss had a saying "if you lie to me about aomething I know about I can I believe you on things I don't know".I think it would need to be stated how far the photographer was away from the action.

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

I had faith in newspaper articles until I read about an events that I witnessed. Many mistakes and not even close to accurate

larryepage Loc: North Texas area

Hopefully Dalek will reply, I know that when I was a docent at mansion at the center of our local arboretum, leadership felt the need to change the rules around photography inside the house...supposedly because photographers were interfering with tours by taking over when they used it as the "set" for engagement photographs, senior pictures, quincaneras, you name it. It is an interesting house...Spanish colonial revival outside, British, Greek, and other styles inside.

Anyway...result was that those legitimate visitors who brought "real" camera equipment could no longer take any photographs, but it was completely impossible to enforce the rule when someone just happened to shoot a photo with their cell phone. I stopped enforcing the rule at all rather than penalize those with standalone cameras.

In my mind the point is that even though smartphones can be competent means of doing photography, they are also like the old 'spy cameras.' No one can know for sure whether the user is making a call, reading a text, or taking a photo or video. Even at school, I have to always be aware that one or more of the students just might be capturing me on video.

Steved3604

A long, long time ago when I was about your student's age a veteran newsman said some very astute words
to the new kid at the TV station. This fellow had worked at the networks, was the first WWII reporter to
broadcast (radio) from a USAAF B-17 and was on the Missouri for the signing of the peace treaty with Japan.
He said to the new kid --me-- that would probably be shooting 16mm B&W film on some "low value" silent
(no talking head reporter) news stories. He said "Tell them what you saw -- I have the editorial page to tell them what you think." Then the news director added his two cents --"Give me 7-5-3." He then explained that if the station has to air the film with a tight deadline (no editing) the camera man needs to shoot 7 seconds of a wide shot, 5 seconds of a medium shot and 3 seconds of CU (close up) and then some more footage. Made an impression on the new kid. Still true today.

DonB Loc: Port Royal , Tn

Yes, but it has been proven that even if you stage an accident, and ten witnesses know they have to report on that accident, that you will get ten different descriptions of the accident. In the case of a car hitting a tree, the car color was reported different and even which side of the road it was on. I have been interviewed many time and not once has the reporter gotten it right.
I see where the OP has an interesting few weeks ahead of him. Wish I could attend his sessions!