On June 15, 2009 Senator John Ensign admitted to a 9 month affair with former employee, Cindy Hampton (Cillizza, Washington Post). In a blog covering this story, Jim Rutenberg of New York Times The Caucus made the decision to include the name of Mrs. Hampton’s son. While it is in the public’s best interest to be informed on the senator’s affair, the name of Mrs. Hampton’s son was not only unnecessary, but it added no more appeal to the story than if it was left out. This pointless disclosure of the son’s name only permits avoidable humiliation to a person undeserving of such vulnerability.
Rutenberg either released this person’s name without thinking anything of it, or intentionally made his decision after overcoming a moral dilemma. Perhaps this writer believed that by including the name of Hampton’s son, people may consider his article better researched than if he hadn’t. In this case, after weighing out his options, the journalist decided that his reputation was more important to him than the personal life of Hampton’s son. While at times journalists must decide against what may be considered morally right in order to benefit the greater society, Rutenberg crossed the line with this blog.
Another example of moral dilemmas in the media is a story on the extramarital affair of Senator Mark Sanford of South Carolina. This affair was widely covered this past summer in June due to its exotic appeal of a mistress in Argentina. The Senator, as well as many media resources, respected the privacy of Sanford’s mistress. Sanford apologized, and explained to some extent the details of his affair tastefully. For NY Daily News reporter Helen Kennedy, however, this was not enough. On June 25, 2009 she reported in the bold headline of the article “Maria Belen Shapur Identified as South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford’s Argetine Mistress (NY Daily News).”
While this moral dilemma may be more in the grey area than the example previously cited, it is still an issue of morality. By disclosing the name of Sanford’s mysterious mistress from Argentina, Kennedy certainly fed the curiosity of many readers. However, while it is important to inform citizens of a politician’s extramarital affair, it is not important or vital to society to know the name of a politician’s mistress. This journalist chose disclosure of the truth over the more moral choice of respecting a person’s privacy.
These are only two of many examples of moral conflicts a journalist will face in his or her career in disclosing truth. Day to day and case by case, it is necessary to make choices based on ones moral beliefs and ones job as a journalist. It is important to remember that morality is opinion, and whatever choice a journalist makes regarding disclosure of controversial information it is neither right nor wrong.
Sources:
