Questions and Topics We Can Help You To Answer:
Paper Instructions:

This assignment requires you to choose a specific media ethics controversy and articulate a position supporting or opposing what was done. There are several options:

            ▫ Choose one of the ‘Case in Point’ case studies featured in the Plaisance textbook (there are 4 in each ‘principles’ chapter – one in journalism, one in PR, one in advertising, and one that is digitally focused).

            ▫ Browse the journalism-related cases at the site for the Society of Professional Journalists: https://www.spj.org/ethicscasestudies.asp

▫ Browse the media ethics archive at the Indiana University School of Journalism site: http://journalism.indiana.edu/resources/ethics/

▫ Look through the “Cases and Commentaries” section of recent issues of the Journal of Media Ethics.

▫ Browse through some of the many ethics case study books in the library – on journalism ethics, PR ethics, advertising ethics.

 

            To begin constructing an argument, obviously you need a position from which to argue. How do you think the issue / incident should have been handled? What might the players have failed to consider, which led them astray? (I don't want you to regurgitate any argument the case author may make; use that as a starting point for your own argument.)

 

            Once you've defined your position based on research, take me through the evidence to support your position. This may take several pages. Keep in mind that the fact that you "feel" that something should be such-and-such does not constitute support in an argumentative paper. Your position may stem from your opinion; the support for that position may not. I will be looking keenly for your ability to construct a compelling argument based on logic and presentation of factual evidence and inferences made from that evidence. This paper should not be used as a showcase of how eloquently you can drone on about your opinion of this or that.

            While you are trying to perform this ethical deliberation, keep in mind the importance of identifying the values ​​and principles at stake, as well as who exactly are all the stakeholders, and to what degree should each of their interests influence what should be done. I will be looking to see how effectively you make use of the MERITS model on page 42 of our Media Ethics textbook and the questions featured in each quadrant. (Note: You are NOT allowed to use Mill's utilitarian approach as a guiding principle in the service of your argument.)

            Regarding the selection of a guiding principle, the decision should be based on which “fits” best with the core issue of your chosen case. Choose one of the following:

Aristotle and his framework, as well as the work of Philippa Foot to update him, to ensure that our actions promote human flourishing for others, as well as his principle of moderation applies to the clash of competing, legitimate values;
Kant and the principle of human dignity & transparency, as well as Ross and his argument about prioritizing our various duties, applies to questions regarding the use of deception or of truth-telling;
Rawls and the principle of distributive justice applies to situations involving unequal power situations or questions about fairness.
 

After presenting your supporting evidence, a) restate clearly how this evidence supports your opinion, and b) address any rebuttals or challenges that could be made to your position. The first should be straightforward; the second is trickier but just as critical. A strong argument acknowledges and responds to the opposition; a person making an effective argument says, "I understand you may not agree with this, because of X, Y and Z, but here's my response to your position and to the challenges that X, Y and Z pose to my own position. "

 

            Conclude by restating your position and emphasizing the more compelling evidence that supports it.

 

            Your paper should be about 2,100 words and include a bibliography of at least 5 outside sources. This first thing I look at is the quality / depth of your research. It may help to check out some of the bibliographical references in your chosen chapter. Wikipedia is not acceptable as a source. Some Web sources you may valuable include poynter.org, the smokinggun.com and various mainstream news media sites. The textbook itself may be counted as one of your sources, but only if you're drawing from parts of the book other than the case study that is the focus of your paper.