Thankfully I have found my way to this class, as I have been a self-taught ‘student’ of media and ethics for at least two decades. Prior to this journey out of the darkness I drank all the media sponsored Kool-Aid that I could find completely immersing myself within the smoke and mirrors spun from some of the most famous and most prestigious presenters ever. Looking back over what I was taught throughout my educational journey, what message the Powers That Be tried to hammer home, and my own awakening I have concluded that in no uncertain terms, that the term media ethics is an oxymoron. Unapologetically this IS the foundation for much of my writing and will be until I find evidence to the contrary. I don’t ask that you agree with me, only that you open your mind to new possibilities.
I found the story of Ruben Salazar’s life very reminiscent of the Greek tragedies I read in my youth. Like Odysseus, he was noble and idealistic, his calling was to provide news to Spanish speaking people who were underrepresented at the time. He left his respected position at the LA Times to become News Director for TV station KMEX, a heroic move at the time. His story is the perfect example of the conflict between Harmonia and Discordia as represented in the video “What are Journalism Ethics?” by the National Endowment for Democracy.
I agree with the premise in Harmonia that news consumers should create an incentive for ethical journalism, possibly even paying privilege of having news free from spin. This would be more reporting of the facts directly, possibly even providing positions from both sides of the story. Harmonia would put the public good, truth and freedom of the Press above all else. The antithesis to this was Discordia or the push away from the truth catering to ratings, sensationalism and strife. Discordia would also be a close ally of the government, often providing overdramatized stories shouted with loud voices from as many outlets as possible to take the focus away from more real issues.
The tragedy of Salazar’s story fits seamlessly with the never-ending examples of police brutality including the unwarranted attack against radio journalist Adolfo Guzman-Lopez. Daniel Hernandez tells us in his LA Times Article titled “Police violence against journalists recalls slaying of Ruben Salazar” that this was no one time experience is has been documented those attacks on reporters happened in all 50 states during the George Floyd protests. Events such as these illuminate a persistent friction within the media world, where the pursuit of what is right often bucks with resistance and violence from those sworn to serve and protect.
In conclusion I believe Ruben Salazar’s narrative should serve as both a historical lesson and a call to action. It exemplifies the importance of maintaining a free press that speaks for those who cannot. The truth as I see it is further lost within the battle against those who wish to control the narrative. David Draiman’s quote ‘People who are divided are easier to control’ seems to be the media’s new mantra.
hi
Hello! I’m glad you found your way to this class. I think it’s reasonable to start from the position in which media ethics appears an oxymoron. What I can tell from the rest of your post is that you view a story like Salazar’s as one that “exemplifies the importance of maintaining a free press that speaks for those who cannot.” So there is room for honesty and independence in truth telling! But as you write, the gatekeepers are out there trying to control the messages, tell us who we are, keep us all squawking at each other, and sell us the latest gizmo, trip, social media, bingeworthy series or whatever else distracts us and makes the rich richer.
Thanks for your thinking and writing here, Marc.
Deidre