Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
When it comes to honesty, journalism and PR issues are often controversial, and what seems justifiable in case with the latter is often inadmissible in case with the former. Both journalism and PR strongly depend on the public opinion this is why it is crucial for both of them to earn the public’s trust. Journalists can do it through honestly holding their opinions and basing them on the provable facts (Pearson 231). At this, the most important for the journalist is to remain neutral and objective, but to make the public interested at the same time. In case with PR, however, attracting public attention becomes the primary purpose and quite often the means in which this is done are not taken into account. With regards to the case concerning Caitlin and Bird Textiles, the public is likely to adopt a consequentialist perspective; on the other hand, even if this situation is viewed from the deontological perspective, the truth will have to be disclosed to the public anyway.
To begin with, viewing the situation from consequentialist perspective, the public has a right to know truth about Bird Textiles. The public has always encouraged freedom of speech and believed those figures that were honest with them. Most of people are ready to accept the most terrible truth, rather than to be ignorant of something that is important to them. In case with Bird Textiles, the public would wish to read the negative report about the company because then it would start believing the magazine and regarding it as a credible source of information. If all the reports were positive, it would mean that most of them are unfair this is why publishing a negative report will make the public satisfied, thus promoting public good. Therefore, from the consequentialist perspective, Caitlin should write all the truth about Bird Textiles because it will make the public believe her report.
Assessing the situation from the deontological perspective, it becomes clear that Caitlin should present a fair report to the public because it is her duty as a journalist. The journalists are expected to “report and interpret honestly, striving for accuracy, fairness and disclosure of all essential facts” and not to “suppress relevant available facts, or give distorting emphasis” (Ahern 164). Moreover, it is the duty of the public to accept this information, irrespective of whether they are pleased or disappointed with it. Similarly, Bird Textiles’ duty is to perform in a way which would be attractive to the public and it is the problem of the industry’s leader that he acted in a way which seemed unacceptable to Caitlin. The duty of this leader is to bear responsibility for his behavior and publishing the negative report would show that he has this responsibility.
From the public’s position, deontological perspective seems to be the most beneficial because it allows the public pursue its own interests by presenting them as its duty. As viewed from this perspective, a good journalism seems to have all the values which the public expects it to have. Those are reliability, honesty, and desire to perform its duties. With regards to Bird Textiles, the core values which the public expects from it are responsibility for its actions and desire to please the customers. This means that an honest report should be published, which would be beneficial for the public and for Caitlin. Its being of no benefit to Bird Textiles means that its leader lacks core values which the public expects from its leader.
Works Cited
- Ahern, Steve. Making Radio: A Practical Guide to Working in Radio. London: Allen & Unwin, 2006.
- Pearson, Mark. The Journalist’s Guide to Media Law: Dealing With Legal and Ethical Issues. London: Allen & Unwin, 2007.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.