Instead of an unethical news story, I found a story online about an unethical headline. The story was first published on the website Wired about a colonel who was fired because of a rant about his superiors and their methods. One of the things he mentioned was the use of powerpoints. Wired published the article with the headline "Colonel kicked out of Afghanistan for anti-powerpoint rant" Slate then picked up the story with the headline "Colonel fired for hating powerpoint." These headlines are misleading because he was actually fired for publishing an unauthorized editorial. He doesn't hate powerpoint, he just didnt like the use of them in his job. These headlines made it seem like a respected colonel was kicked out just for something menial, which lowers the reputation of both the former colonel and the military.
I like that you brought up the issue of headlines. Even if a story is completely factual, a headline can still complete mislead readers and pose ethical dilemmas for the editor of the paper and those involved in the story. Plus, a lot of people only skim through the headlines of stories and don't actually read the full-length product, so the fact that the headlines were inaccurate likely makes the misconception in this situation even more damaging.
ReplyDeleteI think it is very important to discuss headlines in the discussion of ethical dilemmas. Headlines can really mislead a reader and inaccurately portray a story. I catch myself sometimes only reading headlines when I am in a hurry which could be bad if the headline is misleading.
ReplyDeleteI agree, stories aren't the only aspect of journalism that can turn libelous. Not to mention the fact that the second headline, "Colonel fired for hating powerpoint" isn't a very good headline unless they have a direct quote from him saying something to the effect of "hating" powerpoint. Definitely not a headline I would have run.
ReplyDeleteSo true. Misleading headlines are a great way to get hits...and possibly sued.
ReplyDeleteI think the most infamous (and I’ll admit, a bit amusing) headline I can think of would be the one in The Red & Black reading: ‘Man sodomized by homeless.’
ReplyDeleteThere were so many things wrong with the headline, and story, that it still makes you wonder what went through their minds when they wrote it. Did all the homeless sodomize him? Wouldn’t that be a national issue? Um..
I agree that the headlines may be the most important part and most easily determines libelous. The people that read the headlines and don't read the article will be mislead if the headline is off.
ReplyDelete