As we sit here is the UAE one of the yard sticks we use to measure our media is the US.

But is the US a good measure?

This Yahoo News story has me and my Ethics students asking that very question.

After Obama’s live, late-evening address from the East Room of the White House on May 1, five photographers were ushered in to shoot pictures as the president stood at the podium and re-read a few lines of his speech — a practice that news organizations have protested for years.

Even though The Associated Press and other news outlets said in captions to the photos that they were taken after the president delivered his address, many people who saw them may have assumed they depicted the speech itself. That raised questions of whether news organizations were staging an event.

 

Is this an issue?

As we debated this idea today there was no clear yes or no this is an issue.

Some did not have a problem with the fakery and others did.

Where the discussion went was what is the purpose of the news and images used.

I suspect a bigger question is can we trust what we see?

And if there has been fakery in the past with speech images where does the buck stop?

If we cannot trust our media we are in real trouble.

The world, like it or not, looks to the US media for leadership and best practices and this little correction by the White House leaves me asking what else have we not been told?

We also talk about the responsibility of the media.

A huge issue confronting the media has always been representation and truth.

The Huffington Post brought this little nugget to our attention and I must confess it left me scratching my head.

I am very happy to report that not one of my students thought that there was ever a justification to edit people in or out of a photo that will be used in the media.

What is even more extraordinary is the offending paper is based in the USA!

Here is the commentary from the Huffington Post.

A Brooklyn-based Hasidic newspaper removed Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and another woman from the now-iconic photo of the Obama national security team watching the raid that killed Osama bin Laden from the White House Situation Room.

The original photo, taken as the raid was occurring, famously shows Clinton in the center of the room, with her hand over her mouth. But the newspaper Der Tzitung, described by the Jewish Week as “ultra-Orthodox,” has a policy of never printing photos of women in its pages because it thinks they could be sexually suggestive. Thus, Clinton and counterterrorism director Audrey Tomason, who was seen standing at the back of the room, were removed from the picture.

Here is the original photo.

And here is the altered photo.

Ethics 101, clearly the editors need to re-take the course, tells you that you do not alter images. If the image doesn’t work find another.

I am shocked that this paper could think that religious grounds justify image alteration.

Without ethics our media is worth nothing.

The problem is not the amount of available material to discuss.

The challenge is putting all players on a level playing field with respect to ethical expectations.

Here is an interesting piece from AdAge.

The American Advertising industry has a new ethics code!

“These are not set in stone,” he said, noting that additional principles could be added and current ones changed based on feedback. He hopes to provide both a carrot, in the form of recognizing marketers and agencies that abide by the code, and perhaps someday a stick in the form of reviewing complaints that they haven’t.

Of course the issue is always buy in.

I find it interesting that this is being said in America!

“I believe [the code] will lead to a new way of thinking about ethics from, ‘Well, we should be ethical’ to ‘We’ve got to be ethical to build our business better.’”

Here are the big 8.

Principles and Practices of Advertising

• Advertising, public relations, marketing communications, news, and editorial all share a common objective of truth and high ethical standards in serving the public.
• Advertising, public relations, and all marketing communications professionals have an obligation to exercise the highest personal ethics in the creation and dissemination of commercial information to consumers.
• Advertisers should clearly distinguish advertising, public relations and corporate communications from news and editorial content and entertainment, both online and offline.
• Advertisers should clearly disclose all material conditions, such as payment or receipt of a free product, affecting endorsements in social and traditional channels, as well as the identity of endorsers, all in the interest of full disclosure and transparency.
• Advertisers should treat consumers fairly based on the nature of the audience to whom the ads are directed and the nature of the product or service advertised.
• Advertisers should never compromise consumers’ personal privacy in marketing communications, and their choices as to whether to participate in providing their information should be transparent and easily made.
• Advertisers should follow federal, state and local advertising laws, and cooperate with industry self-regulatory programs for the resolution of advertising practices.
• Advertisers and their agencies, and online and offline media, should discuss privately potential ethical concerns, and members of the team creating ads should be given permission to express internally their ethical concerns.

What I still find amazing in all of this is that the fox is still being left to guard the hen house and I am not sure that an industry that so many times falls off the ethical straight and narrow can be expected to police itself.

As always more questions than answers.

OK, GMER2010 was no TED and not even close to a TEDxDubai, but it was very interesting.

What was interesting about 14 academics talking ethics from the theory through to the practice in broadcasting and a lot in between?

What I realized is that our ethical beliefs are all over the map!

Maybe what we need is ethical thinking to be clearly implemented into our KG through university education AND we need to make sure everyone takes these courses.

If we experimented with ethics in an academic environment I am certain our ethical applications int he real world we live would be far more coherent!

Yes we need ethical training beyond what we get in the home.

I suspect all too often we miss the signs that what we are doing is having an impact.

Today I was working with a class on an end of term project and gave the all clear to leave 20 minutes early.

The usual reaction of students is to run!

Today as I sat at a desk after giving the all clear command I was in shock!

For 25 minutes 2 groups of students were planning, debating and organizing the work they had to do for the project.

And best of all they were working as if I was not there! The bonus for me was that I got a chance to listen in on the thinking process.

My verdict?

Something got through, I am doing something right.