PressEthic

When considering some of the issues and ethical scenarios presented in class, I was reminded of a particular dilemma that befell a fellow reporter and photographer for a Spanish-language newspaper I used to work for in Dallas. The paper, for those interested, is "Al Dia," and it was created as a wing of the Dallas Morning News to capitalize on the ever-growing Hispanic market in the city.

The paper would, and still does, mainly cover issues and stories regarding Hispanics and regularly includes stories translated from the Dallas Morning News that have a wider scope and are relevant to a larger audience. The paper did, however, have a group of about five reporters, including myself (my official title was "News Assistant," but essentially I was a slightly less-paid reporter.)

The dilemma I mentioned earlier centers around one of the reporters and the head photographer, who both headed out to the Arizona-Mexico border to cover the Minutemen Project, which was receiving national attention. The two reported on a number of stories, giving the paper some great front page original material to show off. But perhaps the most intriguing story the two had to tell upon their return had nothing to do with the Minutemen, but rather the ethical role of the journalist, something already touched on in class, and which I'm sure will be discussed further.

During their stay on the border, the two reporters (yes, one is a photographer, but I'd rather call them both reporters for sake of brevity) came across a woman who had apparently made her way across the border, and was visibly in physical pain, perhaps from heat exhaustion. She was stranded in an area that seemed like desert land and had no visible help around her.

The reporters stopped the car they were traveling in when she came across their path and talked to her. She mentioned that she was in need of help and asked for a ride, as she could barely walk anymore and could be caught by the border police at any moment. One reporter seemed open to helping the woman, but the other argued that it would be unwise and could jeopardize their objectivity in the stories they publish. After much debate between the reporters, they ultimately decided that they could not, under ethical reasons, help the woman, and instead left her there as they drove off.

The photographer later wrote an opinion piece about the incident in "Al Dia," which I attempted to retrieve online, but was unable to find, in which he makes the case for why it would have been wrong to help the woman. He brought up how he and the other reporter, a woman, would have put themselves in danger if they were caught helping someone illegally enter the country, a valid and strong point.

But he also mentioned that by helping the woman, he and the reporter would have placed themselves in the "story," and would therefore be unfit to publish stories or photos, for that matter. He received many negative responses from readers, saying that the ethical thing to do would have been to help someone who was clearly in need.

I've tried to place myself in the same situation since. I find that my initial reaction would be to help this person, who could be in grave danger. But as I've pondered this question more, I've come to understand and even agree with some of the points brought up by Al Dia's photographer. As a journalist, I believe the decision he made was correct. But, as Tracy brought up in another blog entry on this site, what about as a human?

Is it necessary to strip ourselves of typical sympathetic human emotions and reactions at times, to not seem biased or subjective? I'm not really sure about that answer, but I think in this case, the difference between being a reporter and being a human results in two different reactions.