PressEthic

In light of the debate that the evolution story spurred, I thought I'd bring up another interesting religious debate. As I was reading the New York Times online, I came across an advertisement for Fordham University, a Jesuit college.

First of all, this brings up an even bigger question about the Times and online advertising. While I do not know much on the subject, I am trying to make sense of it. Several ads on the NYT website have an "advertising link," which you can click on. This opens up a new window with the Times' disclaimer, explaining that the Times does not endorse the advertiser or their link.

However, several advertisements do not provide this link, including Fordham. I am not sure what this means, but even if it did provide this link, I'm not sure it would make a difference. As a reader, I am still associating the ad with the newspaper and with the article that I am reading right next to it. Also, the "advertising link" is in such small print, that I've never even noticed it before, and this makes me wonder whether other readers have taken note as well.

Does the Times have control over the ads that appear in its online version? I don't know the answer, but for argument's sake, let's say that it does. In this case, is it ethical for a newspaper, which is said to have an objective outlook, to allow a religious institution to advertise?

On the one hand, I couldn't blame the Times because advertising dollars are hard to come by these days. If it had anything to do with it, the paper probably just took the money and looked the other way.

In addition, I found this particular advertisement to be placed on most articles related to education news. While this is reasonable, it seems as if the paper wanted to frame it as an educational institution as much as possible. I also found advertisements for several other universities, including Columbia, so the ad fits right in with their usual clients.

This advertisement also brings up the differences between publicly funded media and privately owned media. When I worked for a public access broadcast channel, we could definitely not advertise for any church or religious institution, unless it was for an event of cultural or community significance. However, privately owned newspapers seem to be flooded with ads for all different types of church services and religious events. The newspaper has been a place where these institutions can actually reach people who, otherwise, might not have known about it. My hometown paper used to have a column written by a local Christian pastor giving advice about God and life. Should newspapers continue to be an outlet for these religious institutions?

On the one hand, this can provide resources for religious individuals who are looking for things like this. Religious material definitely serves a particular niche of readers. However, it also brings up this debate that religiosity has no place in the objective media. Where do we draw the line?

The Fordham example is so subtle that it is easy to ignore the debate and simply pass it off as an educational institution. When I first saw it, the ad didn't particularly strike me as offensive or ruin my image of the New York Times.

However, when we look at the presence of religious institutions in newspapers, does the issue of freedom of religion come into play as well? It seems like the ethical dilemmas are endless.