PressEthic

You would think that journalists across the profession -- maybe even around the world -- would be trying, at this time in media history, to salvage their collective reputation, which is getting increasingly muddy by the day. So, it is incredibly disheartening, even upsetting, to open up the morning newspaper and be faced with yet another media person who has managed to sully the face of the profession. Yes, I'm talking about Armstrong Williams.

The Bush administration has been accused of purchasing favorable coverage by paying Williams to promote its educational policies. According to the Washington Post, the Education Department paid Williams $241,000 to talk up the No Child Left Behind act both during his television appearances and in his newspaper column. Neither on TV nor in his columns did Williams disclose this important fact to his audiences.The Government Accountability Office (GAO) found that the administration had engaged in "covert propaganda", which violates a statutory ban.

The Post also quotes Williams:

Williams, one of the most prominent black conservatives in the media, said he understands "why some people think it's unethical." Asked if people would be justified in thinking he sold his opinions to the government for cash, he said: "It's fair for someone to make that assessment."

Duh.

Of course, this case crosses the border from unethical to straight up illegal. But, for journalism, the more troubling angle is the ethical one. The administration did something that was illegal -- but Williams's conduct was unethical. He allowed himself to be bought and he violated the principle of transparency. He abused his position as a member of the media. Admittedly, I don't know very much about Armstrong Williams, but frankly I don't care if he is particularly conservative and/or has very strong political views. I don't care about anything except his role as a member of the media -- because by being on the pay of the government, he has failed the profession.

Who's next?