Final Blog Post- Reviewing Student Blogs

Femi Akinpetide- The Privacy Debacle

The last paragraph of this blog entry is really what caught my eye, taking both sides of the dilemma of social networking sites and their ethical responsibilities. In my blog entry about this topic, I stated social networking sites are not exactly responsible. I mean everyone knows that in this day and age, if you want to keep a secret don’t put it on the internet. Anything that even slightly goes on the internet, is never completely gone. I think that is where the issue of privacy comes along. It should be common knowledge that privacy and social networking sites don’t go hand in hand, even though Facebook has their own privacy settings, but those only work to an extent. Femi divulges into the fact that even if social networking sites should be monitored, it would be nearly impossible. That point is very true, there is no way of monitoring every little thing said on social networking sites. Cyber bullying is, unfortunately, too much and too fast of a phenomenon to even be stopped. In my blog about the subject I talked about cyber bullying and the best way to attempt to end it is starting with the parents. Teaching children the good old fashioned way, of what is right and what is wrong. Bullying has been around for so long, people often forget that. Social networking is just another platform to which bullies use to well, bully. It all starts from parenting and what goes on at home. Let’s start there.

Lauren Forgione- Ethical Decision Making

I particularly liked this blog entry because it brought up some taboo topics about large corporations, their ethical responsibilities, and the root of all evil, money. Money seems to be the one thing that drives us the most. I mean think about it, we get tickets if we speed, and tickets are money we have to pay. The law states that the worst ethical consequence (no killing anyone for drive 25 over the limit!) of speeding is giving our hard earned money away. When you literally break it down and think of things this way, it’s hard to deny that money doesn’t control our everyday lives. With saying all this, is it really surprising that corporations with put their ethics and morals aside to make a profit? It’s not. And a clear example of this is the obvious, cigarettes. Why do public relations and marketing companies continue to promote cigarettes when, as of 2012, we know for a fact cigarettes can do serious damage to your lungs and throat, and cause cancer. This is all factual information that has taken years to prove. But it has been done, and yet, all the major cigarette brands are still in business and doing well. In the whole scheme of things, the public relations press is doing so well, there are literally people out there paying $9 dollars to smoke something that will eventually kill them. Marlboro Cigarette company, where are your morals?

Avery Owens-Good Ol’ Product Placements

What a great topic! Product placement isn’t something I used to think about honestly until I became a Communications major. Product placement is something that is meant for you not to notice, only to notice subconsciously. Are you following me? I used to be a Fashion Design major years ago when I first started college. I used to always watch those live from the red carpet before the actual awards show. Joan Rivers used to host it, and the one question she would ask every woman is “Who are you wearing?” To me, as a fashion major, I found it intriguing but I always wondered why she asks that. Those celebrities are merely walking advertisements. It all makes sense now. It’s called product placement. These celebrities have to wear SOMETHING to a red carpet event, so these top brands have come up with a genius marketing plan about using celebrities to place their product, and in this case, WEAR it. Celebrities promote this product just by doing one simple thing, telling Ms. Rivers what brand she’s wearing. That’s it. I remember one year when Jennifer Hudson hated the little jacket she was wearing on the red carpet. But, it was fact that she had signed a contract with the designer that she wouldn’t take it off. Celebrities have always been the pawns in the product placement game. Another common example I’ve been seeing lately is the shout out of brands on talk shows. Do you think these celebrities really love those products or are they getting paid to love them? Sometimes you just wonder….

Whitney Selby-Secrets and Scandal

I liked this blog entry because it talked about celebrities and their right to privacy. The model Naomi Campbell being photographed leaving a Narcotics Anonymous meeting was a great example. Was the Daily Mirror justified in running this story? First off, the Daily Mirror is not considered a journalistic source. It’s a tabloid. It’s important to determine the difference. Tabloids tend to exaggerate and emphasize stories. In saying this, I don’t exactly mean that because it’s a tabloid running a story that isn’t fact checked it’s okay. In fact, I’m not saying that at all. I’m not exactly sure how tabloids came about, but they have shifted to the entertainment category as opposed to the alternative hard news category. Tabloids do not have a reputation of always being accurate and they are not a known source for getting news. Now, would The Washington Post run a story like that? I’m not really sure to be honest, but I can say that I’m pretty confident that The Washington Post is a little more strict in their ethical guidelines of what to publish and what to not publish. Also, The Washington Post has more of a standard to look up to, and what they print, has to be clear, concise, and accurate. That is their reputation. Reputation means a lot in the world of journalism ethics.

Priscilla Pauta- A Picture Tells Its Own Story

I’ll never forget September 11, 2001, when I watched Americans jumping from the Twin Towers on the television. It was on every channel. I cried the whole day. The thing is, I don’t think I would have cried nearly as much if I wasn’t watching the actual footage. Images and photographs are meant to catch a moment in history and time. The fact that photographs of 9/11 are considered controversial really bothers me. Priscilla, a graduate student, is talking about the issue in her ethics blog. I’m perplexed as to why it’s considered unethical in the first place. The photographer, Drew, was simply just doing his job, and capturing a moment of history in a photograph. Priscilla talked about how there are certain elements to what is done with the photograph that could put it over the unethical line. An altered photograph or a photograph of a tragedy sold for monetary gain are two factors in which could make an unethical situation. Altering a photograph to deceive an audience is unethical in a way. When it comes to gruesome photographs like this, we must remember that real things and tragedies happen everyday. To capture them with a photograph is not unethical. In fact, I can even put a bigger spin on it, and say to not share these photographs are unethical. The public have the right to information and 9/11 was most definitely an event that needed to be reported on. God Bless!

Blog Post #5

There are a couple of reasons why Polkin and The Suburban Journal were ethically justified in maintaining the neighbor’s privacy. The article ‘Doing the Ethical Thing May Be Right But It Isn’t Automatic’ brought to my attention the fact that most people would say they would always do the ethical thing as opposed to actually being put in the situation and having to act on it. In the bullying case, Polkin and The Suburban Journal attempted to protect the identities of the neighbors who cyber bullied a young girl who ended up committing suicide. Playing the devil’s advocate, I can justify this ethical standpoint with an ethical perspective of that of the whistleblower, possibly not being accepted for the neighbor outing. The article states that in certain situations and circumstances, the whistleblower is not always seen as a hero, and could actually be shunned from the group and be seen as breaking the cohesion. Now, I’m not making the assumption that Polkin and The Suburban Journal only care about their stance in society and among their colleagues. But it is a theory, and only that.

The ethical perspective of the Post I believe was that ethical principal of gradual erosion of moral values as opposed to one big leap of moral values. The article talks about a gradual decrease in moral values is easier to then once giant obvious leap. When it comes to the Post identifying and releasing the name of the neighbor, I guess the Post believed this was just the next step in an already damaged situation.

The issues of transparency, harm, justice, autonomy, privacy, and community all play a part in each ethical dilemma. After reading that article about the internet blurring the lines of plagiarism, I found the issue of ethical community is apparent. In this case, the community would be the new media generation students. Things are different now that students have grown up with the internet. There is tons of information just out there on the internet and most of it doesn’t have an author and because it is there, the new generation of students probably feel they can just take it and use it at their own discrepancies. The sense of community almost makes them slightly ignorant to what is ethically and morally right. Privacy plays a role in the article about the bullying. The Suburban Journal would not release the names of the neighbors responsible for the cyber bullying, yet the Post would. Besides the ethical perspectives I previously mentioned, I also think these ethical decisions were based on privacy. Since this cyber bullying family were not charged with a crime, The Suburban Journal may have rationalized releasing the names on the merit of privacy. What’s the point of releasing the names? Why not save the family some harassment and sham because after all, you are innocent until proven guilty. But as for the Post, well, maybe they let their emotions get to them a little, and wanted to expose this family. Or they justified it as them being journalists, and journalists ALWAYS deliver information to the public.

Out of all these ethical perspectives I find community to be the most compelling. There’s something to say about being outnumbered. Ten is always better then one, and more often than not, people will conform in a group, as opposed to their own individual opinion, despite their ethical conscience.

I don’t believe social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace don’t necessarily have the obligation to interfere with cyber bullying. The truth is, cyber bullying is just the new and modern way to bully people. Even if there was no social networking, bullying would still exist. In my own opinion, and I’m not a parent, but I think it comes down to parenting. If we can start there, I think we can avoid most bullying cases. Although, the cyber bullying culprit in the article was a grown woman, that’s just despicable in my opinion. Facebook and MySpace are merely just communities, and don’t have an ethical obligation to monitor and make the calls on what exactly constitutes bullying or not.

Blog Post #4

“Public Relations helps an organization and its publics adapt mutually to each other.” This is the current definition of public relations according to the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA). According to this article, the PRSA are launching a campaign to find the best new definition for public relations in the new digital communications world. There are many reasons why this definition is problematic, and I think The New York Times article really hit it on the head. It’s just too vague. It’s not thorough enough and the definition just doesn’t hit the target of modern day public relations.

I really had to think long and hard about coming up with a new definition for public relations. Public Relations is the way in which information is handled and portrayed to the public by either utilizing digital or non-digital communications. I think this definition of public relations is better and more defined then the original because it modernizes public relations and actually defines how public relations is used in digital and non-digital mediums.

While considering my definition of public relations, I did consider actually using the word ethical. I decided against it for one very important reason. Public relations, amongst all other professions, should all be assumed to follow a certain Code of Ethics. The world is built on ethics and values in which people live their everyday life. There should be no difference when it comes to professions.

I especially found the ethical violation about the Marie Callender’s products being disguised as food cooked by a chef in a gourmet restaurant. Basically they were trying to catch unsuspecting food bloggers eating their Marie Callender’s food and liking it, by disguising it as gourmet food just cooked by a renowned chef. This was done obviously as a public relations strategy to use the surprised reactions by the food bloggers that it was frozen food. Instead, it backfired and the food bloggers were upset. One blogger had a food coloring allergy, which food coloring was found in the frozen food, and another blogger was on a strict diet and the frozen food was loaded with sodium. There’s a few reasons this was unethical. First off, the bloggers privacy was being breached, as they were being videotaped unknowingly. This violates privacy rights without a doubt, and even though the intent was not malicious in any way, and only a public relations move on Marie Callender’s part, it is still a violation. It also violates justice. Being misled and lied to is probably the biggest issue these bloggers have. They probably feel like they have had their personal rights violated. Marie Callender’s didn’t put into perspective that many people have many different diet concerns. That’s where the violation of personal rights comes in. I’m sure that at the end they all felt like guinea pigs in a weird corporation experiment. All in all, the hidden camera footage ended up not being used for Marie Callender’s commercials. It was definitely a bad public relations strategy.

I think by monitoring various public relations practices is a good idea. I think in this way, public relation strategies would become more ethical, if say, there was a fine involved. Isn’t that why we have speeding tickets after all? I think it’s a great idea for top public relations executives who mostly call the shot, be licensed. This way, we can hold a certain standard to those who make ethical and unethical decisions.

Blog Post #3

The career path that I’m looking to get into is public relations. There is a specific code of ethics for public relations. The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) has them listed on their website. Here are the important points from the website:

The Code, created and maintained by the PRSA Board of Ethics and Professional Standards (BEPS), sets out principles and guidelines built on core values. Fundamental values like advocacy, honesty, loyalty, professional development and objectivity structure ethical practice and interaction with clients and the public.

Translating values into principles of ethical practice, the Code advises professionals to:

• Protect and advance the free flow of accurate and truthful information.
• Foster informed decision making through open communication.
• Protect confidential and private information.
• Promote healthy and fair competition among professionals.
• Avoid conflicts of interest.
• Work to strengthen the public’s trust in the profession.

Code guidelines, like tactics supporting strategies, zero in on putting value and principles into play for working professionals facing everyday tasks and challenges. Among them, professionals should:

• Be honest and accurate in all communications.
• Reveal sponsors for represented causes and interests.
• Act in the best interest of clients or employers.
• Disclose financial interests in a client’s organization.
• Safeguard the confidences and privacy rights of clients and employees.
• Follow ethical hiring practices to respect free and open competition.
• Avoid conflicts between personal and professional interests.
• Decline representation of clients requiring actions contrary to the Code.
• Accurately define what public relations activities can accomplish.
• Report all ethical violations to the appropriate authority.

In the case study in Chapter 2 in the book, the case was laced with ethical dilemmas. In this case, the husband was accompanying his wife to pick up a ‘bombshell’ videotape story from a NBC affiliate. The videotape contains a pertinent conversation of a prisoner, which ends up being a violation of his rights. The husband is now an accomplice in an ethical dilemma, unbeknownst to him.

These ethical guidelines from the PRSA help me understand what exactly the ethical dilemmas were in this case. The first guideline is to protect and advance the free flow of accurate and truthful information. Depending on what kind of information was on that videotape, really determines the situation. If it was a confession to a crime of some sort, the truth should always be made apparent. But, the argument here is the way the information has gotten into the communications professional’s hands. That’s where the dilemma comes in, because you could be following the Code of Ethics but also be breaking the law at the same time. This is a time where the Code of Ethics is actually not helpful. 

The ethical dilemma about the husband now being an accomplice to a situation where he didn’t even know what was going on, he was just trying to be a good husband, is not so black and white. To have his innocence proved in this situation, he’d have to actually prove he was absolutely not sure about the situation.

To be fair, and I’ve talked about this in the previous blog post, that ethics really comes down to what you feel in your gut is the right thing to do.

Blog Post #2

Knowing information that is a secret, and whether or not to disclose that information is a very hard to decision to make. Especially if others weigh in on their opinion and decide that it is not a good idea to disclose. If it were me in that situation it would be a difficult decision for me, but ultimately I would follow my gut. When I give advice to friends and family in my everyday life, my main focus is just letting them know that listening to that gut feeling, your conscience, it tells you to do the right thing. All you have to do is listen. If you listen to your conscience you’ll never do the wrong thing. So if I was in the situation, I’d make my decision based on how I felt and not under the influences of others.

I think about the WikiLeaks controversy. WikiLeaks leaks secret government documents and it was created by whistleblower Julian Assange. In 2010, WikiLeaks began publishing United States diplomatic cables from the Iraq and Afghan War. When it comes to government documents, it’s tricky to figure out whether the public needs to know certain information about war issues. The truth is, that sometimes those secrets are the very secrets that could put someone’s life in danger, and in this case, a soldier’s life.

Danger definitely fits into my criteria for whether or not a secret should be told. More criteria would be whether or not to hurt someone’s feelings or not. I think that ties into the little white lie. In class we talked a little about the infamous question, “Does this make me look fat?” Now, what exactly is the right answer? If you say yes, you hurt her feelings. If you say no and she does, you’re lying. What is the right thing to do? I’d say in this case, lying is ok, because you are preventing hurting the person’s feelings, and it is not putting anyone’s life in danger. Now, when Ellsberg said there’s a difference when something is wrongfully kept, I think he was right. There are things in this world, that people just need to know. For example, I watch the news just about every night, and they almost always have a segment about investigating neighborhood scams. If you know about a scam going on, I feel like as fellow human beings we have the right to warn others. It is our social responsibility.

There are many consequences when it comes to fallouts from leaking information. For example, Bradley Manning, a United States soldier who is to believed to be the one that leaked the US cables to WikiLeaks. He spent time in maxiumu security custody and was even said to be in solitary confinement.

As a media professional, I feel like it is impossible to avoid getting tangled in secrets. I mean especially in journalism. As a journalist, it is your job to get the news to the public, the bad, and the ugly. Knowledge is power, the more we know the better we’re informed. In any profession in the world, people are going to be face with ethical dilemmas. It’s just about doing the right thing, and listening to that guy feeling. Like we spoke about in our groups in class, if you can sleep at night, you did the right thing.

Blog Post #1

Since beginning my marketing and public relations internship at Classic Media, I have learned a lot about the business of marketing. I’ve actually become quite interested, as marketing has many elements to it. Marketing is not only promoting and spreading the news about a product or idea, but also creating marketing materials for that purpose. Regardless to say, I’ve become more open-minded at the possibility of choosing marketing as a career path. With that being said, marketing, like many other professions, comes with ethical dilemmas. Thankfully, at Classic Media, I have not personally come across any ethical controversies. However, I can certainly think of a few scenarios that would be very probable in the field.

Why are models in magazine advertisements so skinny? Why are they never average weight or a few pounds overweight? Being skinny was never important many years, yet today, is all the craze? Diet pills and other weight loss products make up a billion dollar industry. Where and when did super skinny become a trend? I’m honestly not sure but something tells me marketing has something to do with it. When Abercrombie and Fitch use very skinny models half naked in their advertisements, they are no longer just marketing their product they are marketing an image. I think that’s where marketing ethics comes in and becomes a factor. Abercrombie and Fitch is no stranger to marketing ethics. In fact, not too long ago, Abercrombie and Fitch marketed push-up bra bikini tops to young girls. Many people became outraged. Abercrombie and Fitch, in my opinion of course, are pushing the ethics boundary. Marketing an adult product and disguising it as a child’s product is just well, unethical to me. This product is marketed to 7 and 8 year old girls. In my opinion, they are pushing young girls to be sexualized people way too early in life.

Abercrombie and Fitch heard the criticism but refused to pull the product. To me, in a situation like this, Abercrombie and Fitch should not only pull the product, but also make a public apology. The thing that outrages me the most, is that these marketing professionals should have more ethical guidelines than to market a product like that. They are the adults. Adults are the ones that are supposed to be watching out for our youth, not promoting sex because well everyone knows sex sells. We are supposed to be the grown-ups. As an adult, you should already have the tools to make responsible decisions, like a conscience, common sense, and the most important, values. Values is essentially the most important tool that keeps society in check and helps with ethical decision making.

I’ve learned a lot about business ethics from school and real-life experiences. The most important lesson I’ve learned, is that not everyone has the same ethical guidelines. Maybe, deep down inside the chief marketing coordinator really doesn’t see an issue in these push-up bikini tops. Honestly, you never really know. It is important that we all understand that this is a free country, and we do have rights, and a majority of what makes this country so great, is the fact that we have so many different people living here with different values and opinions.

So I guess that is the ultimate issue. At what point do ethics cross into legal issues? I guess that’s a great question for this Media Ethics course, huh?