PressEthic

A reporter should never get involved in the events he or she covers. You know, that whole fly on the wall theory – detached, impartial, recording the events for the greater good. But, sometimes it’s not that easy. Sometimes reporters are in a position where they can help a situation, or possibly save a life. Is it right for them to throw down their pens and cross the line?

In what I found to be a very informative article, Rachel Smolkin, the managing editor at American Journalism Review, addressed this difficult question. Through her own experiences, and the experiences of other professionals, Smolkin presents various situations where reporters must decide to remain spectators, or lend a helping hand.

I cannot blame the journalists for the decisions they made in the predicaments they faced. At the very least, I can understand why they made the decisions they did. Conflicts like the ones that reporters faced after Hurricane Katrina presented unique ethical dilemmas, and I would argue that many of the journalists made the right decisions to help when they could. However, the decision is never clear and there is definitely no authoritative opinion among professionals in the field. Smolkin writes:

Among journalists and ethicists I interviewed for this story, no one took an absolutist stance that journalists should never help under any circumstances. Some seemed deeply conflicted about when to intervene. Others were perfectly comfortable rendering any assistance possible after the hurricane, noting the suffering was so vast that their small contributions hardly altered the outcome of the story.

Smolkin notes that though the decision may not be easy, there are some guidelines to follow. She quotes Paul McMasters, ombudsman at the Freedom Forum’s First Amendment Center:

McMasters says that among the factors to consider in deciding whether to intervene is "how natural or instinctive the journalist's impulse is and whether or not there is potential for immediate harm or injury without the journalist's involvement. It is very important that the journalist quickly returns to their professional role as soon as the moment passes." But, he adds, "that's not a very good answer. In the world of journalistic ethics, there are seldom good answers or pat answers."

How true. Perhaps the best advice comes from Smolkin’s conclusion:

Follow your conscience. Your humanity – your ability to empathize with pain and suffering, and your desire to prevent it – does not conflict with your professional standards. Those impulses make you a better journalist, more attuned to the stories you are tasked with telling. If you change an outcome through responsible and necessary intervention because there's no one else around to help, so be it. Tell your bosses, and when it's essential to a story, tell your readers and viewers, too.

Remember, though, that your primary – and unique – role as a journalist is to bear witness. If you decide to act, do so quickly, then get out of the way. Leave the rescue work to first responders and relief workers whenever possible.

The journalists covering Katrina showed compassion by offering water, rides and rescue, but their most enduring service was to expose the suffering of citizens trapped in hellish shelters and on sweltering interstates, and to document the inexcusable government response.

Without journalists fulfilling that essential role, the resources to help on a larger scale might never have arrived.

Before this semester, I did not give this problem much thought. I accepted the traditional answer of remaining detached and objective. However, I now realize that not every situation is so clear. Especially after reading Smolkin’s article, I realize that there are situations in which a journalist must balance his or her role as a disinterested communicator of events with the human elements of empathy and compassion. The right answer is never clear or easy to come by, and perhaps a journalist will often choose between the lesser of two evils, but the fact that we try to find the right choice, well, that’s absolutely necessary.