Case Study: A Personal and Professional Dilemma

 

The issue that is represented in this case is that a managing editor of a newspaper in a small town must decide whether to run an emotional photo of a grieving mother crying after she lost her two daughters in a house fire or not. The woman in the photo is also wearing only her nightclothes and is showing a lot of emotion while being restrained by also emotional-looking police officer. This case is further complicated by the fact that the managing editor’s own family (cousins, aunt, etc.) were also lost in a house fire many years before. The media prying into his family and bothering them while they were grieving this time caused a lot of resentment for the managing editor, and also served as a reason why he avoided becoming a reporter for many years afterwards. However, he believes that the photo should be ran because it is so emotional and therefore tells the story well, as they say “a picture is worth a 1000 words”, and also would serve as a helpful reminder to readers and therefore might save many lives. The case that is represented here is whether the managing editor should run the photo, despite the emotional pain it might cause the family and readers, to make an impact and potentially help save a life, or not.

The dilemmas that are raised in this case study are that of conflicting loyalties, social responsibility, communitarianism (and utilitarianism) and Aristotle’s Golden Mean. Conflicting loyalties are the loyalties to one’s profession, citizens, and the truth VS. the loyalties to one’s self and family. Should the editor remain loyal to citizens, his profession, and the truth by publishing the photo and therefore potentially saving many lives by causing fear in order to get people to buy smoke detectors, check their fire ladders, etc.  Or should he remain loyal to himself and his family and not cause any excess grief like the grief that was bestowed upon them in a similar situation by reporters. In a situation such as this, one must make the decision as to which loyalty should take precedence. Furthermore, social responsibility is also a dilemma within this case study. Journalists serve an important social responsibility to inform the public of public business. In this specific case does informing the public of public business involve the managing editor showing them the photo and therefore forewarning them of the dangers of improper fire safety.

Communitarianism is also related to the idea of social responsibility. Communitarianism states that social justice is the predominant moral value and that social justice is a form of self-discovery by the community for community enlightenment. Social divisions define community, in this context. Totalitarianism, Utilitarianism, and Aristotle’s Golden Mean, are all related dilemmas that are also raised in this case study. Aristotle’s Golden Mean states that one should avoid extremes and practice moderation in all things that they do, it really emphasizes that everything should always be in moderation. Happiness is the ultimate human good. Considering this ideal, the editor must ask himself, by sharing this photo with the public am I avoiding an extreme and practicing moderation in my reporting. One might say no due to the fact that there is so much emotion shown in the photo and it was taken at such a personal time that it might shock some readers. Utilitarianism is a concept defined by J.S. Mill’s as there are consequences that matter in decision-making. Mill’s has a connection to Aristotle’s Golden Mean by stating that; “the best action is that which brings the greatest happiness and the least amount of suffering.” J.S Mills goes on to speak of the idea of valuation hedonism; that pleasure/the absence of pain is the only intrinsic moral end and that one should create no suffering. Sharing the photo might also challenge this value as it may cause a lot of pain and suffering to the woman in the photo as well as her family. It also might upset some readers and cause them unhappiness upon viewing the photo. He must take these values into deep consideration before deciding whether or not to publish this photo.

When making the final decision of whether or not the managing editor should publish this photo he should follow the Potter Box decision-making model. The Potter Box decision-making model involves these steps;

1. Review the facts of the case

2. Consider your loyalties

3. Review your own values

4. Consider appropriate principles

When reviewing the facts of the case one can see that the main dilemma faced by the managing editor in this situation is that of whether he should publish the photo and potentially cause emotional distress to readers and the family, as well as potentially disappoint his own family who had faced a similar situation. But, in doing so also potentially save the lives of many citizens and better show the dangers of fire and improper fire safety. Next, the managing editor should consider his loyalties. The loyalties involved in this case are that of: loyalty to the truth, to family, to self, and to citizens. Loyalty to citizens should always take precedence over all other loyalties for a journalist. After this, he should review his own values. This case affects him more personally than others as it was also something that has affected his own family, this personal experience should be taken into consideration when making a final decision. Lastly, when making his final decision he should consider appropriate principles. In doing this he must make sure he verifies the information and the photograph before he shares it with the public. He also must create a forum for criticism and compromise, which he did by sharing the editors to the letter (in which many were upset), taking phone calls by citizens over the situation, and writing an open letter in which he described his final decision to share the photo. He also must keep the news comprehensive and proportional to the story, in this case he made the right decision as he did not blow the story out of proportion and made the story more comprehensive by sharing the photo of what truly happened in the fire. The editor also upheld the principles of fair reporting, both good and bad, and maintaining independence from the story with his decision. He fairly reported the story and believed that by showing the photo he was being fair to the citizens. He also maintained independence from his subjects/the story by choosing to share the photo despite his own personal negative experience in a similar situation.

            Based on the ideals outlined above, I believe that the managing editor made the right final decision in sharing this photo with the public. I believe he made a conscientious effort to uphold the proper principles and loyalties held by journalists in his decision and were both fair and accurate in his reporting.